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

New Orleans and Baltimore class cruisers under powered

New orleans and Baltimore  

23 members have voted

  1. 1. Should New Orleans RoF be buffed to 5 rounds per minute with stock guns and 6 rounds per minute with upgraded turrets?

    • Yes this is a much needed buff for the ship. (leave a comment explaining why)
    • No this will make the ship over powered. (leave a comment explaining why)
  2. 2. Should the Baltimore RoF be buffed to 8 rounds per minute?

    • Yes this is a much needed buff for the ship. (leave a comment explaining why)
    • No this would make the ship over powered. (leave a comment explaining why)

40 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
771 posts
1,374 battles

To put it simply these two ships are terribly underpowered at the moment.

Lets compare these to their competitors the Myoko and the Ibuki.

 

New Orlenes: Tier 8

Armament:

9 203mm guns

8 127mm  guns (secondaries)

Rate of fire:

4.3 rounds per minute = 38.7 rounds per minute

Engine/speed

107,000hp (33 knots max)

Maneuverability

63

 

Myoko: tier 8

Armament:

10 203mm guns

8 127mm guns (secondaries)

16 torpedoes (8 either side of ship)

Rate of fire:

5 rounds per minute = 50 rounds per minute

Engine/speed

132,000hp (35 knots max)

Maneuverability:

69

 

Baltimore: tier 9

Armament:

9 203mm guns

12 127mm guns (secondaries)

rate of fire:

4 rounds per minute = 36 rounds per minute

Engine/speed:

120,000hp (33 knot max)

Maneuverability:

59

 

Ibuki: tier 9

Armament:

10 203mm guns

8 127mm guns (secondaries)

16  type 93 torpedoes (8 on each side of ship)

Rate of fire:

4 rounds per minute = 40 rounds per minute

Engine/speed

152,000hp (35 knots max)

Maneuverability:

66

 

After comparing these ships it is my personal opinion that a rate of fire buff is needed for both the Baltimore and New Orleans, the Myoko and Ibuki both have a higher RoF with more maneuverability and the added bonus of torpedo launchers, that is just unfair in all senses of the word in my opinion.

New Orleans RoF should be at 5 with the stock guns and 6 with the upgraded guns, Baltimore should be at 8 rounds per minute, This would also improve the game play of these ships considering they only have 3 turrets to work with.

 

As a side note, for this buff to be considered OP the Des Moines would have to be OP with its 90 rounds per minute rate of fire with its 9 guns..

5, 6 and 8 rounds per minute all fit into the respective tiers i am targeting them at.

 

the other option would be to nerf all the IJN cruisers rate of fire by 1-2 after Aoba, nerf Des Moines RoF down to 8 per minute and buff the RoF on new Orleans to 5 per minute and baltimore to 6.

 

 

 

Edited by Fear_the_Reaper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
284
[PANZA]
Senior Moderator
820 posts
932 battles

Newsflash for you, Fear_the_Reaper. Balancing of ships characteristic is not done from polls on the forums. It is solely done from statistics harvested on the server from battles done with the various vessels. And both the New Orleans and the Baltimore are doing fine in that respect.

If you find that you are failing in them, it is not the ships fault. It is solely your own fault. 
Rule of thumb for ANY vessel in the game : Adapt your playstyle to the vessels characteristic. Utilize its strengths and be aware of it shortcoming when playing it. Dont expect the vessel to adapt to your playstyle, or to perform in the same way as the preceeding vessel in the same line.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
771 posts
1,374 battles

Newsflash for you, Fear_the_Reaper. Balancing of ships characteristic is not done from polls on the forums. It is solely done from statistics harvested on the server from battles done with the various vessels. And both the New Orleans and the Baltimore are doing fine in that respect.

oh i am sorry, i was under the impression that during a BETA test you test the game and then provide feedback on the game..... :sceptic:

That is why i created a poll so that other testers can vote for themselves and it is also why i asked them to leave a comment with their reasons for their vote, if wargaming wants to ignore feedback from the BETA testers that is being provided to them free of charge then that is not really going to be my problem is it?

all that means is the game will end up like world of warplanes because look how well not listening to the BETA testers went with that game.

If you find that you are failing in them, it is not the ships fault. It is solely your own fault. 
Rule of thumb for ANY vessel in the game : Adapt your playstyle to the vessels characteristic. Utilize its strengths and be aware of it shortcoming when playing it. Dont expect the vessel to adapt to your playstyle, or to perform in the same way as the preceeding vessel in the same line.

As far as your cracks about my gameplay go i am not failing in these ships i am averaging 1-3k experience in them, that does not mean they are not unbalanced at the moment.

Me and you both know you dislike me which is probably 90% of the reason why you dismiss anything i say as heresy....

Must be nice sitting up on that high horse of yours man.

 

Do you actually have something productive to add or is this just going to be a passive aggressive argument? 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
416 posts
17 battles

Providing feedback is different to demanding a rebalance. 

 

Did you take the rest of the line into account? If everything was perfectly balanced, the game would be very boring. 

 

Also, last time I checked, this was a beta. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
181 posts
905 battles

I dont find the RoF on the New Orleans to be all that bad actually. I find it's capable of handling itself in many situations quite adequately. 

 

That being said I'm still on the stock guns only just recently unlocked the bloody thing after enjoying my time in the pensacola a bit. It's a slow firing ship yes, but at the same time it's a hard hitting ship when she lands shots down range in a timely manner.

 

I think a RoF buff to it wouldnt really improve on it all that much. Perhaps a slight increase in turret rotation would be a better option for it, since currently it's a bit slower on the old turret movement but as with the RoF it's workable and holds it's own when needed. 

 

plus it's got a fairly strong citadel I think I've been magazine hit once in it and that was by a battleship and all I did was laugh and go drive my Iwaki until the battle finished.

 

I cant comment on the baltimore as I'm yet to unlock it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,083 posts
5,169 battles

i would love to see tier 8 and up American CA having higher turret survivability since that their only weapon and they only have few. i experience a game where my new orleans front turrets got taken out, 1st by  a destroyer and 2nd one by a cleveland. it was a close domination game, i was down to 4k hp and i cant even support my team mate properly since my two front guns are down and i'm so low on HP.

 

just got my baltimore today and already experience its turret getting taken out by cleveland multiple times. seriously they need to do something about cleveland 6 inches gun its just super effective against any ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
39 posts
169 battles

They aren't unpowered, you just don't have the skills to utilize them yet. It's the same in WoT, there are some tanks that require a certain play style to get the most out of them. Forget what you've learned with other ships and take each one as its own unique unit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,163 posts
1,874 battles

Frankly, I feel its less of the Pensacola, New Orleans and Baltimore being weak and more of the goddamn Cleveland being a bruiser. HP mechanica in this game favour ROF and the Cleveland is a monster because of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
523 posts
217 battles

New O is a bit of a monster if you use her right. Low dispersion, decent range, punchy shells. Ive won duels against multiple cruisers before, simply by being able to lay down more accurate fire at range. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Already in Alpha Testers
300 posts
938 battles

Frankly, I feel its less of the Pensacola, New Orleans and Baltimore being weak and more of the goddamn Cleveland being a bruiser. HP mechanica in this game favour ROF and the Cleveland is a monster because of that.

 

Yes!! These are my feeling also.

 

Also a direct comparison of IJN and US cruisers needs to take into account all of the variables involved, such as shot dispersion, armour layout and AA capabilities to name a few.

 

Personally US cruisers are my favourite line and if anything I feel they are over-powered rather than under-powered, but this is probably due to them really suiting my play style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
771 posts
1,374 battles

im confused at the moment there was a thread saying that ijn cruisers were underpowered but now there is now this im confused to which nation is underpowered

 

Both?

American ships have a rate of fire problem, Japanese have a citadel problem.

neither thing is a good way of balancing the ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
771 posts
1,374 battles

I think a RoF buff to it wouldnt really improve on it all that much. Perhaps a slight increase in turret rotation would be a better option for it, since currently it's a bit slower on the old turret movement but as with the RoF it's workable and holds it's own when needed. 

 

plus it's got a fairly strong citadel I think I've been magazine hit once in it and that was by a battleship and all I did was laugh and go drive my Iwaki until the battle finished.

 

I cant comment on the baltimore as I'm yet to unlock it.

A turret rotation buff so that it can easily  re engage enemies quickly while maneuvering probably would be a much better solution now that you mention it, that combined with Yansuki's suggestion for stronger turrets would be plenty of a buff for these ships.

 

Frankly, I feel its less of the Pensacola, New Orleans and Baltimore being weak and more of the goddamn Cleveland being a bruiser. HP mechanica in this game favour ROF and the Cleveland is a monster because of that.

 

So true, Cleveland is half the reason i have a problem with both New Orleans and Baltimore if i am honest, just seems silly that both ships after the Cleveland are essentially steps down not up. The pensacola is an alright ship though i had no complaints with her, its still not quite as good as a Cleveland but it can hold its own against one if you can find a citadel shot :P
Edited by Fear_the_Reaper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Already in Alpha Testers
300 posts
938 battles

A turret rotation buff so that it can easily  re engage enemies quickly while maneuvering probably would be a much better solution now that you mention it, that combined with Yansuki's suggestion for stronger turrets would be plenty of a buff for these ships.

 

 

So true, Cleveland is half the reason i have a problem with both New Orleans and Baltimore if i am honest, just seems silly that both ships after the Cleveland are essentially steps down not up. The pensacola is an alright ship though i had no complaints with her, its still not quite as good as a Cleveland but it can hold its own against one if you can find a citadel shot :P

 

The Des Moine at tier 10 is going to very rewarding and will be something like the Cleveland in terms of OP'edness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
771 posts
1,374 battles

 

The Des Moine at tier 10 is going to very rewarding and will be something like the Cleveland in terms of OP'edness.

 

I know lol, but i just wish there was a reason to keep the New Orleans and Baltimore, i do like them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
181 posts
905 battles

I think it's more the New Orleans and Baltimore are different types of cruisers versus the cleveland. New Orleans for example was a heavy cruiser, more akin to a mini battleship where as the Cleveland was a Light cruiser, so she was faster, lighter had smaller guns and could fire quicker than her heavier, harder hitting sisters in the New Orleans and Baltimores. 

 

So whilst they are Cruisers they are two seperate types of cruisers and thus shouldnt be compared to each other as being indicative of how the whole class should be. Personally I think they should of broken up the tech tree like they did in WoT, ie Light cruisers, heavy cruisers etc etc but it is a beta so they may very well flesh out the tech tree before the final release. 

 

That's really why the New orleans rotates slower, fires slower but hits harder she's a heavier cruiser than the cleveland which was designed for high maneuvering and fast firing to escort and assist friendly fleet units.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
523 posts
217 battles

Of course, if WG were to introduce a damage model that that acknowledges the large performance gap between 6" and 8" shells, this wouldnt be so much of a problem. The 6" Cleveland and 155mm Mogami mounts wouldnt do inordinate amounts of damage, and the higher tier cruisers wouldnt be seen as inferior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,163 posts
1,874 battles

Of course, if WG were to introduce a damage model that that acknowledges the large performance gap between 6" and 8" shells, this wouldnt be so much of a problem. The 6" Cleveland and 155mm Mogami mounts wouldnt do inordinate amounts of damage, and the higher tier cruisers wouldnt be seen as inferior.

 

Amen to this. The 6" guns are way too effective with the current damage model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
3,033 posts
1,487 battles

 

Amen to this. The 6" guns are way too effective with the current damage model.

 

The thing is, they compressed the range in game but uses real life penetrations for calculations, so the armor values are almost worthless. Shells are penning in places they shouldn't and such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
523 posts
217 battles

 

The thing is, they compressed the range in game but uses real life penetrations for calculations, so the armor values are almost worthless. Shells are penning in places they shouldn't and such.

 

Well, that actually depends. We know the ships and map are on different scales, and that velocities are massively overstated, but if the shell travels on the map scale (and I dont see why it wouldnt), then the ranges arent a problem. 10km in game would correspond to 10km RL. Shell arcs seem reasonable as well, so any messing around with velocity has been compensated by increases in gravity. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
3,033 posts
1,487 battles

 

Well, that actually depends. We know the ships and map are on different scales, and that velocities are massively overstated, but if the shell travels on the map scale (and I dont see why it wouldnt), then the ranges arent a problem. 10km in game would correspond to 10km RL. Shell arcs seem reasonable as well, so any messing around with velocity has been compensated by increases in gravity. 

 

 

 

The thing is, 10km in-game isn't really 10km in-game. I know it's weird, it's actually 2km, but written as 10km. Torpedoes with 50+ knots do not reach 5km in 30s, for example. As for shells, lets take Amagi's 790m/s shells. It would take 25s for it to hit something 20km away, but it's around 13 - 15s in game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
523 posts
217 battles

 

The thing is, 10km in-game isn't really 10km in-game. I know it's weird, it's actually 2km, but written as 10km. Torpedoes with 50+ knots do not reach 5km in 30s, for example. As for shells, lets take Amagi's 790m/s shells. It would take 25s for it to hit something 20km away, but it's around 13 - 15s in game. 

 

Ive had this conversation with you before... You have a distance, a time and a speed, they dont stack up, so clearly one is being misreported. It cant be time, so that leaves distance and speed, either of which could be misreported. Odds are that the ships and torps are actually moving faster than the claimed speeds, and the shells have been given different velocities from their RL versions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
3,033 posts
1,487 battles

 

Ive had this conversation with you before... You have a distance, a time and a speed, they dont stack up, so clearly one is being misreported. It cant be time, so that leaves distance and speed, either of which could be misreported. Odds are that the ships and torps are actually moving faster than the claimed speeds, and the shells have been given different velocities from their RL versions. 

 

One of the dev states that they used real life calculations for penetrations so there's no way they would use a different shell velocity for it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
523 posts
217 battles

 

One of the dev states that they used real life calculations for penetrations so there's no way they would use a different shell velocity for it. 

 

They just used range tables, naval guns were pretty thoroughly tested, look one up on wikipedia, it'll have a list of angles and penetrations at specific ranges. 

Share this post


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

×