California Impression

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 17 січ 2025
  • WORK IN PROGRESS
    Discussing how the California looks and plays in her first version in WoWs. I'd like to see some tweaks to her, make the California more appealing to players. Hope you have a wonderful day and I'll catch you next time!
    Tier VII American Battleship California Replay
    notserreplay@gmail.com for replay submission
    warships.us/no... - Warships Friend Invite
    / discord - Discord Server
    Stream at Twitch.tv/notser

КОМЕНТАРІ • 455

  • @ipsusgaius4044
    @ipsusgaius4044 5 років тому +240

    Panama Canal doesn´t matter, as long as she will fit through Two Brothers its a thin enough BB.

  • @a.d.coberly5646
    @a.d.coberly5646 5 років тому +91

    Based on the video, it looks like the California after it's repair and modification post Pearl Harbour. Her hull was widened to improve the underwater protection scheme and increase stability and the secondary battery was replaced with sixteen 5-inch/38 cal dual-purpose guns in twin turrets and she received a large number of close-range anti-aircraft guns. In total, she was fitted with forty Bofors 40 mm guns in ten quadruple mounts and forty-three 20 mm Oerlikon guns.

    • @vridiantoast7096
      @vridiantoast7096 5 років тому

      Also compared to the New Mexico, her gunnery was superb. Although the triple fun setup is still not going to be as accurate as a three gun setup.

    • @MasterofBlitz
      @MasterofBlitz 5 років тому

      Also if I am correct the California part of the Tennessee class battleships were the ultimate version of the US Standard Class battleships packing 14in guns. A lot of the improvements that were post New Mexico class and earlier was incorporated into the Tennessee.

    • @McLoven-vm1ck
      @McLoven-vm1ck 4 роки тому

      I don't know next to nothing about WW II warship's typical secondary/AA configurations but that sounds like a lot.

  • @cosminlesutan3574
    @cosminlesutan3574 5 років тому +195

    WG about:
    SUBS : we know that historically they had lower underwater speed but for the sake of gameplay ...
    US BB: We must keep the historical accuracy BECAUSE REASONS :)))))))))))))

    • @play030
      @play030 5 років тому +7

      That's an old and tired joke.

    • @purplespeckledappleeater8738
      @purplespeckledappleeater8738 5 років тому +7

      @@play030 Insert yo mom joke here

    • @i_nameless_i-jgsdf
      @i_nameless_i-jgsdf 5 років тому +3

      Are you serious? Sub can be killed in less than 10 second, can you really compare that to a battleship? And of you unhistorically buff the US BBs then people who play other nations would ask for the same included me...

    • @CS-zn6pp
      @CS-zn6pp 5 років тому +9

      Tbh, I'm done with the game when subs are introduced.

    • @thomasembleton1467
      @thomasembleton1467 5 років тому +11

      Well if they went historically accurate Russian cruisers wouldn't have radar and their paper battleships would be trash

  • @SuperLoconnor
    @SuperLoconnor 5 років тому +119

    the USS California was a Tennessee Class Battleship which was basically a modified/upgraded New Mexico

    • @alien_tater4391
      @alien_tater4391 5 років тому +25

      DrBlackjack The Tennessee class had more in common with the Colorado class than the New Mexico. The two classes have the same turbo electric engines and the same hull form the only real difference between them at time of construction was the gun system.

    • @427Arbok
      @427Arbok 5 років тому +1

      @@alien_tater4391 Was about to say the same thing, but I see you've beaten me to it

    • @josephburns5269
      @josephburns5269 5 років тому

      DrBlackjack CORRECT

  • @stepbruv8780
    @stepbruv8780 5 років тому +294

    LOL LOT OF GUN?IS THIS THING EVEN LEGAL IN CALIFORNIA?

    • @scottwebster5721
      @scottwebster5721 5 років тому +14

      it used to be

    • @Lightoffivestars
      @Lightoffivestars 5 років тому +10

      Savage

    • @neilbaird2789
      @neilbaird2789 5 років тому +5

      Not since 2009

    • @ToeCutter454
      @ToeCutter454 5 років тому +18

      the guns are all single shot with manual reloads so that it meets California law and everything that was plastic has now been replaced with paper equivalents!

    • @harold562
      @harold562 5 років тому +1

      But... can it shoot books?

  • @erikpetrov701
    @erikpetrov701 5 років тому +85

    Just make the US secondary BB's in the tech tree.
    X Ohio
    IX Georgia
    VIII Massachusetts
    VII California
    VI, V = ??
    Im just trying to say, that WG can make another BB line.

    • @WildcatUK247
      @WildcatUK247 5 років тому +22

      Nah tier X should be Kentucky. Was never finished.
      IX should be New Jersey
      VIII Washington
      VII Indiana
      VI Mississippi
      V Oklahoma
      IV Wyoming
      III North Dakota
      II (premium) Illinois

    • @MrAllofyourbase
      @MrAllofyourbase 5 років тому +3

      Might be able to finagle a Pennsylvania in at 6?

    • @erikpetrov701
      @erikpetrov701 5 років тому +8

      the point is that there is material for a new tech line

    • @timber_wulf5775
      @timber_wulf5775 5 років тому

      Erik Petrov well first of all switch Mass with SoDak, Cali with Tennessee, Kentucky as the T9, and lastly Louisiana as the T10

    • @battleship6177
      @battleship6177 5 років тому +4

      @@WildcatUK247 thats a alot of just a bunch of repeats in the second line.
      My Line:
      X - Louisiana
      IX - Kentucky
      VIII - South Dakota
      VII - Tennessee
      VI - Pennsylvania
      V - Nevada
      Could probably add another Tier IV but I dont think its really needed (unless u want a Florida)

  • @yourmamom
    @yourmamom 5 років тому +27

    "It's got good AA!" is a selling point from 2 years ago when CVs were either a huge threat or effortless food solely dependent on AA.

  • @itsmemrnukki
    @itsmemrnukki 5 років тому +41

    They should add Arnold Schwarzenegger as the ship's Captain

  • @nprovenzo
    @nprovenzo 5 років тому +25

    "Submarines move at the same speed. Underwater."
    And there's your problem....

    • @ciprianmihaila4050
      @ciprianmihaila4050 5 років тому

      They cant make the speed as it was in real life, by the time they will get from spawn to the center of the map the game would end

    • @spjmrlahey4008
      @spjmrlahey4008 5 років тому +3

      @@ciprianmihaila4050 If WG is willing to throw any semblance of historical accuracy right out of the window to cram subs into the game, they can boost the speed of lower tier US BBs.

    • @McLoven-vm1ck
      @McLoven-vm1ck 4 роки тому +1

      @@ciprianmihaila4050 exactly, I've been playing world of warships since beta and I've always said as much in regards to submarine conversations, that if WG ever did try to include submarines they would have to be aquatic UFOs. The only way they could be competitive in the world of warships environment is if they scale their speeds and capabilities way up.
      At least the most recent testing I've seen they don't seem too ridiculous but oh man, the video flamu published when they first began testing them, they were insane. Alpha striking battleships for half their hull hp with a pair of homing torpedoes and they're only counter was destroyers....
      I still continue to enjoy Warships but sometimes WG can really shake my confidence in their decision making regarding WOWS. (Fingers crossed)

  • @ROBERTO-in2iq
    @ROBERTO-in2iq 5 років тому +35

    I'd like if WG buffs her secondaries too. I once proposed, a while back, a secondary focused alternate battleship line with: Nevada Tier 6 Tennessee Tier 7(sister ship of the California), South Dakota Tier 8, Wisconsin Tier 9 and, well, at the time I didn't knew it, but now is say something similar to Ohio at Tier 10.

    • @CS-zn6pp
      @CS-zn6pp 5 років тому +3

      They just made them all premium ships....

    • @TwisterTLT1
      @TwisterTLT1 5 років тому +5

      C S they made all the sister ships of the original class premiums which is not uncommon (look at QE and Warspite)
      But I think
      T5 Nevada
      T6 Tennessee
      T7 South Dakota (1920s)
      T8 South Dakota (1930s)
      T9 NJ
      T10 Ohio Sister or something similar.

    • @timber_wulf5775
      @timber_wulf5775 5 років тому +1

      Parker Fields SoDak 1920s at T7 would be absolutely fucking broken

    • @gabrielm.942
      @gabrielm.942 5 років тому

      Timber_Wulf how so? The original concept was a formidable ship and comparable to t7 Americans bbs

  • @steeltrap3800
    @steeltrap3800 5 років тому +7

    Clearly this is the version after she was re-floated then extensively modified after sinking at Pearl Harbour.
    As for submarines, don't worry about it Notser. WG has assured everyone they won't release subs into general battles until all the balancing and other factors are worked out.
    It's not as though they have a track record of releasing things that don't seem to fit the rest of the game and throw balance out the window. (/end denial mode)

  • @lexmaximaguy8788
    @lexmaximaguy8788 5 років тому +39

    Shes a thikkkkk one love the rebuilt american standards.....

  • @The_Dr_Anarchy
    @The_Dr_Anarchy 5 років тому

    Notser the USS California was a Tennessee class BB that was actually sunk at pearl harbor and was refloated and received minimal repairs and sent back to the us west coast for full repair and modernization where they greatly increased the torpedo bulges which allowed them to make the deck wider and completely replace her secondaries with the 5 inch 39 caliber guns and went with the post pearl harbor US philosophy of "look a free spot, put an AA gun there"

  • @fabiomarangon2748
    @fabiomarangon2748 5 років тому +5

    The Tennessee, California and West Virginia were rebuilt this way after Pearl harbour. They were the widest American battleships short of the Montana class...

  • @Metal_Auditor
    @Metal_Auditor 5 років тому +1

    As a big fan of the New Mexico, I gotta say that extra range and tighter dispersion is more enticing to me than the AA.

  • @AdViCro
    @AdViCro 5 років тому +3

    2:30 Captain, the enemy Helena just dissapeared. Captain: Oh yeah, she did.. ;-)

  • @ivvan497
    @ivvan497 5 років тому +33

    When you rework CV and it is still dead... Nice WG.

    • @Aetrion
      @Aetrion 5 років тому +2

      I really wanted to play CV, but it just isn't fun. It's like shooting with an underpowered weapon that takes several minutes to reload and the enemy can destroy the shells before they hit. If the damage was amazing there might be an argument there that it's worth it, but every time you score torpedo or bomb hits you're just disappointed with how little that did. There is no way to outsmart enemy AA either, it just kills your planes with no way to really avoid it, so it doesn't feel like you're having a contest of skill with the enemy ship.

    • @CynicallyObnoxious
      @CynicallyObnoxious 5 років тому +3

      Its not fun I found the RTS fun and challenging to play and the dmg was rewarding now I feel like i have to work harder for rewarding dmg in a CV they just arent fun to play WG f'ed up because the old 50+ year old old pappers whinged and whined they werent good and got stomped because they refused to sit at T6 and learn and well you see what we got and those old farts still cant do anything.

  • @Ramiiam
    @Ramiiam 5 років тому +25

    Another 21 knot US BB in a game that's about to have subs that travel 20 knots submerged and fire homing torps? Yeah, that's what the game needs.

    • @el-cee
      @el-cee 5 років тому +6

      Because it is historical... (irony may be included in this post)

    • @tiago4158
      @tiago4158 5 років тому +4

      @@el-cee yup... Since WG is going to fuck up the game with subs and did so already with the CV rework anyway..

  • @Dpp40
    @Dpp40 5 років тому

    Just an fyi, the USS California BB-44 is a Tennessee class battleship. It is part of the Big five, which consists of the California, Tennessee, Maryland, West Virginia, and Colorado. Just to help clear up the confusion since Noster called her a New Mexico. I'm sure someone has also pointed this out already, but I'm sure most people won't scroll down far enough in the comments to to see it.

    • @ChibiBritishDwarf
      @ChibiBritishDwarf 5 років тому

      Never heard of the saying Big 5 when it comes to the Colorados and Tennessees, what i have heard of though is the Big 7 which was the Nelsons, Colorados, and Nagatos. Still an interesting tidbit of history

    • @Dpp40
      @Dpp40 5 років тому

      The Big five for the us navy refers to the Colorado and Tennessee class bb because of there similarities to each other in terms of appearance. All five of them had two cage mast with the three tier control towers on top. The only difference between the two classes is the Tennessee class has 14 inch guns and the Colorado class had 16 inch. Most of the internals were the same also till the modernization after Pearl Harbor attack. New Mexico class would remove there cage mast during modernization and the Pennsylvania and Nevada class would upgrade from cage mast to tripod mast. West Virginia, California and Tennessee would all resemble the South Dakota after modernization while Maryland and Colorado would lose the aft cage mast. Long story short they were similar in appearance to each other.

  • @Borzoi-appreciator
    @Borzoi-appreciator 5 років тому +2

    American Super Dreadnoughts are one of my favorite types of BBs, I am so happy to see this style of modernized dreadnought, part new mexico part North Carolina/Iowa.

  • @damiandorhoff719
    @damiandorhoff719 5 років тому +1

    California has a 5km base secondary range (7,6km with a secondary build).
    That is good for Tier 6 and 7 since only the gneisenau beat you with 5,3km base (8km) range on the sec.
    6 or even 7km base range is something you find on ships Tier 8 or higher.
    The range of the secondaries are ok.
    The Problem might be that you only have 8 127mm guns per side and enemy bbs (german/French) have a higher number of secondary guns.
    And you have to think about Speed and main gun performence in comparison to Lyon or Nagato or the Gneisenau/Scharnhorst or the Sinop.

    • @thomasbethon9887
      @thomasbethon9887 5 років тому

      The gneisenau also has 15 inch guns, 31 knots, and way better armor. 356mm at tier 7 is below average now and with 21 knots its hard to maneuver your ship into secondary range.
      They could increase the range to 6.5km base or whatever 10km max would be and it still wouldnt change the fact that there are only 8 per side and that its difficult to get in range.
      Destroyers would come in that range often but with only 8 guns shooting at them, it wouldn't be much of a threat.
      This 10% fire chance is best against BBs, but good luck chasing one down in the slowest tier 7 ship.
      This is a test ship, they should bump the range all the way up to Massachusetts range and then reduce incrementally if it's too good... only way to find out

  • @_lumiaart_2010
    @_lumiaart_2010 5 років тому +2

    Slow American BBs don't bother me Notser. Said me I have no problem with slow USN BBs. You can place it at tier 8 and I'll play it just to prove a F poit. Buff the secondaires out to 9 km max for Balance purposes. They could also add more deck armor around the center of her starting at number 1 turret all the way to number 4 say to the tune of 40 mm for Balance purposes. If she is slow make her the toughest Bitch in a close in fight you will see at tier 7. The Germans have both speed and nasty levels of armor. Make the trade for California be the speed. Butt make the meanest bitch in a close quarters fights. Hell give her secindaires semi AP. With 32 mm of pen.

  • @lynansheng
    @lynansheng 5 років тому +1

    I think it's going to be like 'Bama / Mass. Cali gets the AA fit, then Tennessee is the secondary boat since the Rebel Ship used her bofors in shore bombardment duties.

  • @MaxHDAvenger
    @MaxHDAvenger 5 років тому

    USS California was a Tennessee class Battleship and she was among the ships being attacked during Pearl harbor but she recovered.

  • @jaspergood2091
    @jaspergood2091 5 років тому +11

    This is nearly what people wanted out of West Virginia 1944

    • @outwardpanicjoe8950
      @outwardpanicjoe8950 5 років тому

      Yeah I guess we won't be gettting it after all unless you count wows blitz

    • @christianvalentin5344
      @christianvalentin5344 5 років тому

      I’m wondering if they’re going to do this ship with the secondaries build as West Virginia 1944, kinda like they have Alabama and the secondary build Massachusetts.

    • @crucisnh
      @crucisnh 5 років тому +2

      True, but there's one difference. The Cali is basically a tier6 ship moved up to tier 7 due to its strong AA. If WG followed the same formula, WV44 would be a tier 7 BB moved to tier 8 due to its strong AA. And I have a hard time thinking that a tier 8 WV44 would be any good, even if it had "strong secondaries". It'd still be a molasses slow BB that faces tiers where the slowest BBs (Yammy and South Dakota clones) are currently about 27.5 kts or so.

  • @thomasscaife6867
    @thomasscaife6867 5 років тому +1

    Is it weird that I adore the slow and maneuverable American standard battleships? Arizona and Colorado are two of my favorites at their tiers.

    • @jozseftoth9368
      @jozseftoth9368 5 років тому +1

      Thumbs up bro! I love how sharp they turning, love how strong their guns are!

  • @user_23165
    @user_23165 5 років тому +1

    Now we know from where comes the expression "It's not over, till the fat lady sings"

  • @buzzpedrotti5401
    @buzzpedrotti5401 5 років тому

    I don't know wargamming. But rather something of Battleship history. 21 knots was all California was ever good for. The US Navy chose not to upgrade & repower the large WWI spec battleships like the British did the Warspite during the Washington Naval Treaty period. They became 2nd class ships of the line when the modern WWII Battleships were built after the Naval Treaty lapsed. After they were refloated after sinking I Pearl Harbor the superstructure, AA armament and torpedo bulges were upgraded and these were used primarily as shore bombardment weapons that could defend themselves (in groups) from air attack. A ring of 6 old American Battleships did engage and severely damage one Japanese battleship off Leyte Gulf in a confused night ambush. But this game has invented many improbable warships , notably, advanced German, British concepts and especially fanciful Russian imaginings that were not only were never built, but are not possible technically. Read Friedman. But if Russian programmers control the game specs, so national loyalty calls for imagining up ships better than Yamato, Iowa class which were built, & the Montana which was being built and Vanguard, War weary Britain's last act. Imaginary ships act differently & better than ships with real specs during various relevant periods during the war. By the way, no WWII submarine exceeded 9 knots underwater until a few German prototypes in 1945. Have fun. History merely informs the imagination.

  • @The_Sly_Potato
    @The_Sly_Potato 5 років тому

    Notser, hate to say this because I like your content, but that's what makes the US BB line unique. The slow yet tanky feeling. Of course it's not gonna be effective against certain things, that's how balancing works. Also, I like the fact that it's not better than the Colorado at some things. Premiums shouldn't necessarily always be better than their counterparts. That's how WoT is going, and I absolutely hate it. The power creep is unreal there. But I respect your opinion and will still enjoy new episodes as they come out. Have a good one man 👍

  • @nathanokun8801
    @nathanokun8801 5 років тому

    If this ship is the one with the souped-up, extra-deep anti-torpedo protection side system installed after overhaul against Pearl Harbor kinds of torpedo attacks, it has the best anti-torpedo protection of any warship used in WWII, period. In analyses by the US Navy about battleship anti-torpedo protection, it is not even included in the charts because it outclasses the rest of the US ships so much. I do not know what the game did with this, of course.

  • @fockewulf9518
    @fockewulf9518 5 років тому +2

    Notser any idea when VG is adding USS Oregon? Also, HMCS Mississauga?

  • @Red-zp9ho
    @Red-zp9ho 5 років тому

    I grew up next door to a WII vet who served on the California during the war. He told me so many stories.

  • @ariochiv
    @ariochiv 5 років тому +2

    Unlike the Russian line which are mostly fantasy, the American battleship line is based on real ships. It would be silly to make them faster than they are really supposed to be.

    • @outwardpanicjoe8950
      @outwardpanicjoe8950 5 років тому

      Well they also make some of the German bbs that did exist go faster then the actually could go aswell

    • @ariochiv
      @ariochiv 5 років тому

      Which are you referring to?

    • @outwardpanicjoe8950
      @outwardpanicjoe8950 5 років тому

      Arioch IV I think the just the tier 4-6 ones

    • @frankvc5899
      @frankvc5899 5 років тому

      That’s mainly because they updated their propulsion from coal engines to oil ones It’s what could have been done and thus, the ships go at a higher speed

  • @Scarheart76
    @Scarheart76 5 років тому +4

    I don't mind the slow American dreadnoughts. I've always found them fun to play, but positioning early is important.
    edit: At least this ship is historically accurate.

  • @bigblue4364
    @bigblue4364 5 років тому +2

    0:39 Hey guys remember when the Atlanta had the best AA at tier 7? Yeah well they buggered that up so keep that in mind when considering buying this...

  • @SaiIor_Moon
    @SaiIor_Moon Рік тому

    1:43 Ahhh, it pulls at my heartstrings to see her beautiful 30s reload, back in the day....😔

  • @haydendill6288
    @haydendill6288 5 років тому +4

    The second coming of Christ comes
    Noster: but do you go above 21km/h?

  • @CaptainApollo1377
    @CaptainApollo1377 4 роки тому

    It's a Tennessee class. It can fit through the Panama canal. California has a beam of 97 ft 5 in Panama now and fit 110 ft beam

  • @kingivar6315
    @kingivar6315 5 років тому +1

    When does it release

  • @IsKor06
    @IsKor06 5 років тому +10

    I'd really love the California to be a slow tanky secondary ship. I see that the reload is already fine, so please WG, boost that secondary range so any Georgia/Massachussetts captain can fit right in this THICC beauty.

    • @LordEmperorHyperion
      @LordEmperorHyperion 5 років тому

      I wouldn't waste my time playing it, all you need is one Sub who wants you wants you sunk, and those high damage torps will just two shot you, then its GG..

    • @IsKor06
      @IsKor06 5 років тому +1

      @@LordEmperorHyperion Agreed. With upcoming subs, slow ships will be murdered..

  • @CCI-lv9hr
    @CCI-lv9hr 5 років тому +8

    Looks like it has way better dispersion than NM.

    • @juri8723
      @juri8723 5 років тому

      The Mundorian thats not saying much lol

    • @DoodM4n
      @DoodM4n 5 років тому

      What I was thinking too. Notser is the 1337 sniper too I am sure, but those groupings were really good.

    • @frankvc5899
      @frankvc5899 5 років тому

      It has better sigma So yeah, should be more accurate

  • @alien_marksman
    @alien_marksman 5 років тому +1

    USS California only goes to show how much the the other recent ships added to the game have Power Creeped

  • @Shadx27
    @Shadx27 5 років тому +1

    It is as close as I can get to USS Tennessee

    • @jamessummitt5768
      @jamessummitt5768 5 років тому

      I wish they would at least make a camo to change it to the Tennessee.

  • @lpuig73
    @lpuig73 5 років тому

    This is the rebuilt California post Pearl Harbor attack..

  • @SoCalDude1793
    @SoCalDude1793 5 років тому

    When is she due out? I’m getting her for sure!

  • @Azend_1
    @Azend_1 5 років тому

    You are right, I literally only bought the Massachusetts for the 11.3km secondaries and I loved it. A ship like this at T7 would be great for people with a lower budget as well.

  • @Zeonden
    @Zeonden 5 років тому

    They should make the subs go slow underwater, because the entire idea was that you traveled on the surface first in order to get somewhere just to submerge and setup an ambush position.

  • @strixaluco7423
    @strixaluco7423 5 років тому +1

    "Its really annoying how these ship manage to get away" after you hold your fire for like 1 1/2 min with an Arizona at 12 km for no reason? That scene drove me nuts.

  • @Sky_Eden
    @Sky_Eden 5 років тому +1

    When we will get the forgotten south dakota dreadkougnt as prenium

    • @USMValor-jc5xu
      @USMValor-jc5xu 5 років тому

      I think that will be a Tech Tree ship.

    • @USMValor-jc5xu
      @USMValor-jc5xu 5 років тому

      @@ogantafia1944 He's talking about the original South Dakota 1920, the one with 16" triple turrets. it looked very similar to the Colorado despite its unusual smoke stack.

    • @USMValor-jc5xu
      @USMValor-jc5xu 5 років тому

      @@ogantafia1944 it's okay, sometimes I mix up the 1939 South Dakota with the original 1920s design.

  • @martinzhang5533
    @martinzhang5533 5 років тому +1

    They should probably give her a radar. She was one of theships to pick up the Nishimura fleet in the battle of the Surigao Strait and sunk fuso and yamashiro thanks to that.

  • @ShadowOfMachines
    @ShadowOfMachines 5 років тому +6

    I love American BB speed like I love German BB accuracy...and you can guess how much that is...

  • @RemyMarttini
    @RemyMarttini 5 років тому

    Tier 9 AA at tier 7. Year of the CV amirite?

  • @chrisllewellyn5246
    @chrisllewellyn5246 5 років тому

    I love playing the tx. You just have to read the enemy movement and pick the right route then use proper target priority and Ammo selection

  • @helltbrother2
    @helltbrother2 4 роки тому +1

    First comment in-game chat is fitting.
    "wtf is a california when wwas that added lmao"

  • @wMasterRahl
    @wMasterRahl 5 років тому

    My Texas used to kill an entire t7 squadron right as they were bombing/torping. After rework I could kill 2 tier 6 CV squadrons before they could strike. Now 1 tier 4 squadron can strike 2-3 times before they recall the last 2-3.

  • @bachelorchownowwithflavor3712
    @bachelorchownowwithflavor3712 5 років тому +2

    I am so sick of secondary-focused battleships. Every dreadnought battleship ever designed was focused on its main guns and survivability, not the little pop guns used to chase off torpedo boats.

  • @mr.epicmemerman131
    @mr.epicmemerman131 5 років тому

    When will she be out?

  • @jannischytiris3683
    @jannischytiris3683 4 роки тому

    i want this thing to come back in the shop it looks so cool

  • @hailitalia86
    @hailitalia86 5 років тому

    If there's any blame for lack of CV it is mainly CC's, like Notser himself, who lost their shit when the rework came out and now the CV's have been fucked with so much that they once again have a high skill ceiling and we see them just as much as we used to.
    I learned to play with and against them from the beginning of the rework, while others cried and cried. And I play all classes from DD to BB and do well with a DD, even with a CV in game.

  • @crimsonscarlet5482
    @crimsonscarlet5482 5 років тому +1

    I like your idea with the secondaries, but i havent seem much about the main guns. If main guns are very reliable prob not good idea to buff secondary guns. My opinion

  • @steelraen
    @steelraen 5 років тому +5

    i like to hit islands, said no one ever

  • @JSHolyDiver
    @JSHolyDiver 5 років тому +1

    Out of all the BBs that could use a speed boost as it's gimmick... Why doesn't the USN BB line have 5 charges of Speed boost that lasts a minute 30 or so? Ships stay slow but they give it a gimmick that makes them less painful to play. AA Isn't an American BB gimmick if other ships are in the conversation for maybe being better.

  • @mrtencza
    @mrtencza 5 років тому +1

    Honestly outside of the main battery, this is how I imagined WV44 would be.

  • @tonyennis3008
    @tonyennis3008 5 років тому

    I played 9 tier 7 matches tonight, half had a CV

  • @Spiritus_Invictus
    @Spiritus_Invictus 5 років тому

    Notser, what's your opinion on the change of gameplay these days with the increasing amount of high dps, HE firing ships that are being introduced? Do you think they need to re-balance certain ships, be it BB or otherwise so certain ships can still enjoy their intended role, like brawlers, or knife fighter instead of sitting back sniping or scouting all day long?

  • @Queen_Pallis
    @Queen_Pallis 5 років тому +1

    E X T R A T H I C C

  • @Mafuskas
    @Mafuskas 5 років тому

    Notser, you are exactly right, a secondaries focused (with proper range) California would be awesome. I would strongly consider purchasing one.

  • @MrMustang1945
    @MrMustang1945 5 років тому

    YES!!! A Tennessee class! Finally! I've always thought that this class should have been the tier 7 instead of the Colorado.

  • @brianduff5984
    @brianduff5984 5 років тому +1

    Needs a "prune speed" consumable - ~ 27kts.

  • @tomlapera7594
    @tomlapera7594 5 років тому

    So basically it is Santa Crate ship.

  • @cobra5087
    @cobra5087 5 років тому +1

    “Hey it’s the UA-cam guy” lol

  • @RG-fc7ht
    @RG-fc7ht 5 років тому

    Why is the speed a problem?

  • @matthewluxa7001
    @matthewluxa7001 5 років тому

    how do you obtain it?

  • @shyherdier8988
    @shyherdier8988 5 років тому +9

    "Hopefully WG will listen to CCs and do something good about it."
    Yeah like how good they were about Yudachi and Yahagi. Why does WG even bother testing their ships out to the CCs, it's just a pomp and ceremony jousting tournament these days, WG doesn't care what feedback gets returned they just release the ship however they want. However broken OP or disgustingly weak it is. Pomp and ceremony is all this ST program is (no offense to the CCs, who put in time and effort to assess ships and send feedback to WG).

  • @mtumeumrani376
    @mtumeumrani376 5 років тому

    Speed is not the issue; capability is the issue. The Americans haven't been king of AA since Scharnhorst, Lyon and Gneisenau showed up.
    Given the stealth and health of t7 DDs, an increased range on secondaries wouldn't be a deterrent like it would at t6.
    Texas had t8 AA at t5. New York is also t5. Both New Mexico and Arizona are also t6 and California should be too.
    Regarding Submarines, they need to be sloer than everything but themselves underwater. World war submarines are Semi-submersible torpedo boats not fast attack submarines.

  • @lrock48
    @lrock48 5 років тому +1

    Just like a California king mattress, extra width.

  • @TheAradar
    @TheAradar 5 років тому

    The speed is usually not a issue with Colorado, since it have a great range for it's tier.

  • @fastold
    @fastold 5 років тому

    So like the Texas but at tier 7

  • @bersekovitch
    @bersekovitch 4 роки тому +1

    I wish they added Pennsylvania with 1942 refit

  • @alexhogstrom7276
    @alexhogstrom7276 5 років тому

    Is this a New mexico at Teir 7 with extra things?

  • @nobodyuknow2490
    @nobodyuknow2490 5 років тому

    Oh the delicious irony of Notser saying that this BB with a gimmick built around strong AA is made nearly pointless precisely because people LIKE NOTSER were the ones leading the charge for all the endless, and still ongoing, ludicrous nerfs to CVs and the unmitigated disaster that has been the "CV rework" that is yet-to-work... The entire rework needs to be undone and the CV-RTS at least worked and rewarded skill for both the CV player and other ships.

  • @15DEAN1995
    @15DEAN1995 5 років тому

    is there gonna be another american bb line? the amount of premiums for it you think theyd have put in a 2nd line

    • @luisd157
      @luisd157 5 років тому

      They could same whit the other american premium cruisers like alaska en puerto rico

    • @drosselvonflugel4886
      @drosselvonflugel4886 5 років тому

      still miss t3 premium

  • @David-ys4ud
    @David-ys4ud 5 років тому +2

    All the people crying about planes.... last night I played 25 games and only ONE game game had even a carrier in. This seems to be a blown up problem than an actual one....

  • @TK-fk4po
    @TK-fk4po 5 років тому

    Dispersion looks pretty good too.

  • @snapshotking2545
    @snapshotking2545 5 років тому

    Reminds me of the West Virginia 1944 on World of Warships Blitz

  • @cobra5087
    @cobra5087 5 років тому

    So what you are saying Notser, is you would like to see a secondary build on the Cali? Lol

  • @McNubbys
    @McNubbys 5 років тому +1

    As a Californian...I hope, they do the secondary prune barge, I will probably pick her up😊

  • @forwarduntodawn1000
    @forwarduntodawn1000 5 років тому

    Was this on the pt or live server just wanting to know

  • @garyjones9023
    @garyjones9023 5 років тому

    WG is unconcerned about making subs dramatically faster than they really were. The Cal can't run, can't hide, has no ASW capability, and that big fat torpedo belt has zero effect on homing torpedoes launched from subs. In the current state, the slow BBs are sitting ducks with no counterplay against subs. It will be ***so much fun** relying entirely on your ASW units to (1) not get killed in the first five minutes and (2) show an interest in hunting & killing the enemy subs. Ouch!

  • @honnorgaurd
    @honnorgaurd 5 років тому +1

    If they simply buff her secondaries, that will be enough for me to buy it. I already love her THICK looks. beautiful ship she is. And nothing beats that magic sweet spot of 12 guns

  • @edhikurniawan
    @edhikurniawan 5 років тому +1

    Thicc as California Fried Chicken, yum.

  • @jarrusjenkins
    @jarrusjenkins 5 років тому

    AA stronger than the Hood?

  • @Renzu-ZG_The_Chattino_Sailor
    @Renzu-ZG_The_Chattino_Sailor 5 років тому

    This might fit well in Narai

  • @slaupen
    @slaupen 5 років тому

    For fluxsake, its a HULL not a chassis,, djees

  • @ahadnardekar5501
    @ahadnardekar5501 5 років тому

    What is your crosshair? Would you please tell me.

  • @bullreeves1109
    @bullreeves1109 5 років тому

    30 second reload and accurate version of the New Mexico guns is very good.

  • @honeyroastpenut
    @honeyroastpenut 5 років тому

    Because what the game needs is yet US BB Big Gun Ship

  • @johnvanlopik5924
    @johnvanlopik5924 5 років тому

    Is it constantly on fire?

  • @admiral_hipster2970
    @admiral_hipster2970 5 років тому

    I mean if you wanna get technical the California is a Tennessee Class Battleship not a New Mexico Class

  • @btbarr16
    @btbarr16 5 років тому

    I would buy a secondary based California. It would be perfect for a slow American BB. "Uh oh I pushed up to far and now I can't get out fast enough. At least I have these secondaries and 12 guns to do some could work before I'm burned down." Otherwise why not play the NM or Arizona? At least then there is a better chance of being high-tier.