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

T7 Battleship California - why does it seem crap ??

18 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,000
[OAKUM]
Member
2,115 posts
16,268 battles

Hi all... 

Why does this new ship seem like rubbish ? am I playing it wrong ??

I have a 19 pt captain in it, all the right settings in modules, running the right signals, but still I can't get the ship to perform properly.

I find the Colorado more deadlier than the California,  the shells seem weak at times,  a 19.9 klm limit (which I suppose is livable), the rudder is slow even with the module, & so is the speed buildup...

& it nearly always gets uptiered to T9 games, much more than Colorado does....

It looks like the widest ship in the game, you could put a football field in it its so wide....

Its got very good AA.....

but, like the Viribus Unitis at T5,  you are actively hunted in the game, as a weak ship.....

so what am i doing wrong?  I am still trying to find the ship's proper character...

 

Why are the lower tier premium ships that get released are crap, & the high tier premium ships that get released seem to be overpowered ???

so far, I am really thinking that they need to tweak California, to make it be a little better than it currently is, especially given the fact that it mostly gets uptiered into T9 games....

 

Ordrazz

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37
[AN-DO]
Alpha Tester
86 posts
7,892 battles

Colorado has 16" guns. California has 14" guns. That's the main weakness when you get up tiered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,186
[CLAY]
Member
2,840 posts
12,654 battles
31 minutes ago, Nork22 said:

Colorado has 16" guns. California has 14" guns. That's the main weakness when you get up tiered.

14” guns on a BB in a T9 battle seem like a joke.

But there are quite a few BBs with 14inch guns at T7... so it’s more a matchmaking issue.

Edited by Grygus_Triss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37
[AN-DO]
Alpha Tester
86 posts
7,892 battles
1 hour ago, Grygus_Triss said:

But there are quite a few BBs with 14inch guns at T7... so it’s more a matchmaking issue.

True but:

Lyon - 340mm/13.4" but has 16x guns. Go in a division of triple Lyons and even T9 BBs will be shitting themselves.
Shinyhorse - 283mm/11" but has good rate of fire. And you play the Shinyhorse like a battlecruiser anyway.
KGV/DoY - Fire HE.

And above all else, all the other BBs can go faster than 20 knots.

Edited by Nork22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,186
[CLAY]
Member
2,840 posts
12,654 battles
39 minutes ago, Nork22 said:

True but:

Lyon - 340mm/13.4" but has 16x guns. Go in a division of triple Lyons and even T9 BBs will be shitting themselves.
Shinyhorse - 283mm/11" but has good rate of fire. And you play the Shinyhorse like a battlecruiser anyway.
KGV/DoY - Fire HE.

And above all else, all the other BBs can go faster than 20 knots.

True they all have features that make them workable. Fire chance, rate or fire or volume of fire. And still work fine against cruisers.

There is also Poltava, but I have no idea if that’s even in the game at present or not. I may recall people saying it wasn’t great?
 

In any case, I haven’t played California, so can’t really judge, but I’ve never understood this idea of having slow BBs with weaker armour thing for the alt line. Especially since we already have special and premium US BBs which showcase speed and secondaries.

But slow speed with smaller guns does not make sense.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
267
[TWR]
Member
1,315 posts
4,883 battles

LittleWhiteMouse even came out of a self imposed break to warn players off of the California:

http://shipcomrade.com/?p=4900

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,372
[LBAS]
Modder, Member
6,667 posts
41,535 battles

simply, gave up on Cali

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,267
[-CAT-]
Member
2,495 posts
11,602 battles

WG did not put passive gimmick to the ship.

German ships have 1/4 HE penetration built in.
British DD have instant acceleration built in.

WG "could" put a built in fire and flooding prevention for the UNS premium battleships and T8 to T10 maximum battleships tech tree.
Why WG or Lesta would not or did not put this gimmick in is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ .

 

Russian bias more important.:Smile-angry:
Ironically, Russian players do not even like most Russian ships.:Smile_trollface:
Too much paper. No metal. :Smile_trollface:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,273 posts
13,219 battles

California is a bit weird. Her armour profile looks good in the port viewer - 35mm side plating, for instance - yet in battle she consistently eats big damage from enemy salvoes, regardless of angle. It's been a while since I've played Colorado but I don't remember her feeling as vulnerable as California does.

The 20.5 knot top speed is poor, sure, but it's workable. The really frustrating issue with her speed, however, is her acceleration. She bleeds big chunks of speed every time you touch the rudder and is painfully slow in building it back up again. The other US Battleships like New Mexico and Colorado don't have this problem.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
138
[HKACC]
Member
392 posts
4,597 battles

In WG ship stat database, those +0,1 random dispersion attribute could lead into awfully spread shots. 1 degree spread from the cannon, could result over spread for 100m on target.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
672
[BLESS]
Member
1,237 posts
11,100 battles
12 hours ago, Ordrazz said:

Why does this new ship seem like rubbish ? am I playing it wrong ??

Ordrazz

Consensus opinion says it's the ship, not you.

Fwiw it's a T7 New Mexico. On paper that's not a bad thing but the shotgun traits that make N. Mex good at T6 do not scale well to higher tiers, where speed, good positioning, and overmatch are more important than just blasting broadsides with as many shells as possible.

Slow speed would be ok with heavier guns, lighter calibers are ok on fast hulls, but light guns on a slow ship at high tiers is in my opinion unworkable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
283
[NCOTS]
Member
446 posts
11,075 battles

Of all the T7 14 inchers California has the longest reload (KGV literally has 9 secs faster reload ), in exchange for a heavier broadside which she struggles to bring to the battlefield thanks to the speed. So she's always late to the party 

Quite a bad experience for people playing her. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Administrator, WG Staff
219 posts

I don't think the California is particularly bad, especially when I am team firing. I do feel omega slow in her, though. I am scared to breathe on my rudder because I lose 3-4 knots every time I tap it 🙈

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,448 posts
6,171 battles
12 hours ago, Unraveler said:

California is a bit weird. Her armour profile looks good in the port viewer - 35mm side plating, for instance - yet in battle she consistently eats big damage from enemy salvoes, regardless of angle. It's been a while since I've played Colorado but I don't remember her feeling as vulnerable as California does.

The 20.5 knot top speed is poor, sure, but it's workable. The really frustrating issue with her speed, however, is her acceleration. She bleeds big chunks of speed every time you touch the rudder and is painfully slow in building it back up again. The other US Battleships like New Mexico and Colorado don't have this problem.

I recall New Mexico and Colorado have a "baked-in" special effect to help relieve their mobility problem. They bleed less speed comparing with other battleships in turns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
196
[TWR]
Alpha Tester
1,402 posts
5,044 battles

Think I read someone recommend playing tier 6 USN BBs like Arizona for a better experience, in similar ship.

I'm not up to speed on my USN ships, neither are they, apparently 😛

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,000
[OAKUM]
Member
2,115 posts
16,268 battles

hi all...

 

I think i may be getting the hang of her now,  i changed her modules & gave her engine boost, & that seems to have made her tolerable,  so yes, now she seems to handle more like a giant new mexico now...., & i also add a bit more leeway with my shell judgings... here's my latest game to look at, so yes, i am liking this ship now.......

 

we didnt win, but i did my best... & it was very enjoyable

:Smile_child:

Ordrazz

 

shot-20.08.19_20.28.38-0181.jpg

shot-20.08.19_20.28.58-0583.jpg

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37
[AN-DO]
Alpha Tester
86 posts
7,892 battles
13 hours ago, Ordrazz said:

we didnt win, but i did my best... & it was very enjoyable

Congrats on making it work. :cap_like:

Share this post


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

×