Realizing I had tanked more health than the Minnesota theoretical maximum at the end was just depressing. Vermont has to be ridiculous to justify the Kansas and Minnesota, but I'm not sure how much of a good thing that would be. Two Free XP dumps and a silly 457mm monster? idk, we'll see once I get to test it. Stream: www.twitch.tv/flamuu Insta: instagram.com/flamugram/ Twitter: twitter.com/flamuchz Discord: discord.gg/Flamu
I’ve heard bad things about Vermont’s AP. Very bad things. Same-pen-as-Richelieu, things, since they’re WW1 guns and shells. I desperately hope that’s wrong.
Looked like a good match though your team didn't appear to be concerned about holding any of the caps. If you held at least one cap, the point spread could have been in your teams favor.
I haven't even watched the video yet, but I need to say that the Minnesota is perfect for my clan leader. He has a suicide issue in most of his fast ships, but he can't suicide if the battle is already over by the time he gets there.
I relate to this too much.... in my GK I am dead 5 min in the game. However I always manage to take a ship or 2, sometimes 3 with me. I just play dds to much. Love my Daring
🤦 omg. Kansas , Minnesota , Vermont are all 1930's designs that were cancelled due to the Washington treaty of the 1920's . These battleships would of been part of New Hampshire-Class dreadnoughts an these ones in the game are the refit version thats why they look like bigger Uss California. Other design features were 8x20inch guns. Nth Carliona , Sth Dakota an Iowa were all desighn of fast battleships that "escalator clause" of the secound London Naval Treaty due to Japan refusal to commit to it. Nth Carliona went though 50 designs an was intended to have 12x14 inch guns, but was given 16inch guns instead.
Ya know, now that I think about it..I think with the new "Fattleship" line for the US BB tree, its further reinforcing the stereotype of most American's being fat! XD Rofl. Coincidence? WG might be pulling out an inside joke here. ROFL.
I think the reason players seem to have “lost their patience” is that many people want to play a fun arcade game, and some want to play a strategic game. Problem is that the game does neither well, with historical stats meaning the sum total of jack. I wrote a long diatribe about German Battleships and UK Cruisers, but I realised it boiled down to this; some ships are superior, and you realise it going into battle. When you’re in a sub par/terrible ship, and it’s also a bottom tier ship, aka Albermarle in tier 10 matches, what can you do? You have something like 15.8km range when it’s absolutely maxed, meanwhile there are destroyers with that range in tier 10! Your guns fire barely twice as fast as most battleships, it they hit for 3x the damage. Your armour is paper. It’s not that you can’t effect the battle, but a lot of people hate a slow passive play style that is utterly unlike real life. So they just say “screw it” and lose all regard for their ship. It’s because they constantly end up bottom tier, or see the team folding. Why waste the next 20 minutes behind a rock barely getting 30,000 damage?
TBH, I'm not even sure if it's that complicated thinking or an actual decision to just throw the game without WG making them pink. I think for some it's simply as Hanlon's Razor says: "Never attribute to malice, that which is adequately explained by stupidity." On the Tuesday when the US BBs part 1 came out, I noticed stuff like a DD opening fire with the guns from like 6km on three FULL HEALTH enemy cruisers, they don't even as much fight him as give him an execution by firing squad. I talk about it on the clan TS and hypothesize that the guy must have had a directive to do damage with a DD and no sense on how to do it. Later I group up with a clan mate who is a nice guy but... not good at the game, to put it VERY mildly, and unlike your average case of Dunning-Kruger, he actually realizes it. Then to my horror, I see him doing just that verbatim in his DD. I literally only had time to go, "For the love of boobs, please DON'T start shooting DD guns at cruisers point-blank!" on TS before he exploded. His answer? "But I can't just sail around! I have to do damage for the directive!" Derp. So, eh, there you go. Some people don't actually plan to throw in the towel, so to speak, but just are THAT bad at the game.
@@NegotiatorGladiarius I don't see the problem with shooting DD guns at cruisers...depending on the DD and cruiser, you can rack up dozens of citadels and do some amazing damage that way. I typically finish off CLs with guns after a successful torpedostrike. And I have a 58% winrate...
@@Chrinik Yes, well, that still assumes stuff like AP, that thing being chunked by torps first, and/or making sure their guns are in the wrong direction. Both guys I was talking about started shooting HE at a group of full health CAs at the start of the game. I mean, the first guy didn't even try to torp first (was a russian DD, so their torp range isn't that great), while my clan mate did try to torp, missed (I swear that guy could miss a barn from the inside), then just switched to shooting HE at full health CAs. That's... not quite as sane a choice as what you describe, to say the least.
@@NegotiatorGladiarius people with that IQ level should be banned from the game. Think about how much better the game would be if those braindead players (specially dd players) get banned from randoms for 1-2 battles if they die before the 5 min mark
What's especially infuriating is that the Minnesota didn't have to be as bad as it is. If you look up the specifications for the Tillman/Maximum Battleships designs, ALL of them mounted either the 406/50s or the 457mm guns. Both the Minnesota and the Kansas were gimped from the start, and for seemingly no good reason. Hell, all of the designs had a minimum top speed of 25 knots. As someone who got lucky and got the Minnesota, I can say that if it had the better guns and slightly better top speed, it could've been a legitimate option to Iowa, albeit with many asterisks. What a shame. I feel bad for the art team and WG. So much time and effort for a waste of space and time.
I have a feeling they were made this way because it was determined that the specs were unobtainable for the time they were designed. When you read the other Tilmann designs they just start to get silly with the number of guns per turret, 6. These designs were very much WW1 designs. Once we got involved in a war in the Pacific there would have been no way to keep these ships fueled up as well as their escorts and carriers when looked at from the perspective in Neptune's Inferno. I'm looking forward to these ships going silver so I can finally sell them for credits.
Minnesota and Kansas aren’t Tillman’s their two different versions of the same class the 1920’s SD. Kansas is a Pearl Harbor version of a 1920’s SD while Minnesota is an even more modernized version. They had the 406/50’s or the MK2. In fact since the USN had the guns lying around since the 20’s SD and the Lexington’s got scrapped, they were planned to be used on the Iowa class. until the buero of ordnance fucked up the turrets by making their designs too small to fit the guns. So their choices were either completely redesign the hull of the ship or design new guns. Anyway the 1920’s SD had a top speed of 23knots, the speed that you should be complaining about is the Vermont since that is a “modified” Tillman I design. But since WG doesn’t know how to read the historical documents that are online For Free, they killed the Kansas by giving her the Colorado’s guns and killed the Minnesota by giving her the wrong guns again and the gave her a shell that the hoists on the ship couldn’t physically take so they could keep the high tier US BB’s from having a shell travel time over 800mps.
@@jayvee8502 um the Mk 2 is the same thing as the 406/50 that the 1920’s SD were intended to be equipped with. @Rick rolled bitch personally I think they should’ve made it so HE doesn’t deal HP damage or have the ability to cause fires on the ship if they hit the torpedo budge, until the torpedo budge has been saturated.
Tier 8+ players never want to move up or push until the 'brain rot' takes over after about 10 minutes and most players become very impatient, and usually, they think the game is either definitely won or lost at that point so their plays no long matter. For many though they remain passive the entire match all too often. There are two big reasons for this, one is just the simple deterioration of the playerbase, which is easy enough to figure out. The second is brought about by the rampant and unchecked power creep creating an environment that is simply too hostile to all ship classes (except for 1, and we all know which it is!) DDs don't want to push because of the completely broken, one-sided exchange of rocket planes vs. DDs, the fact that Radar is WAY too common now, and that there are many other DDs that will delete you in a hopeless fight if you stumble upon them (Daring, Kitakaze/Harugumo, etc) CAs don't want to push because of stupidly accurate and destructive BBs that have incredible range and great accuracy combined with common plate overmatch. When it was only Yammy, this was tolerable. Then came Republique. Then Kreml. Then Thunderer. Then Georgia. Then Ohio and Shikishima and Slava, jesus christ man! New AP bombs from Richtoffen haven't helped at all either (hey i'm just gonna fly over and hit for 28k citadel damage, and there's fuck-all you can do about it have fun!) BBs don't want to push due to the insanely cancerous HE spam meta thanks to the likes of Smolensk and lesser offenders such as Harugumo, Wooster, Friesland, AlNevski. While they try to dodge this they also contend with endless walls of insanely fast torps from the Pan-Asian and Pan-Europe DDs that are impossible to dodge on reaction. CVs are the only ones who get to have fun any more, and it shows. The end result is that everyone sits back in spawn just hoping the enemy team will be stupid enough to make a mistake first. I've played WAY too many matches of Epicentre mode lately where one team grabs the points unopposed with 1 or 2 DDs and the other team just lets it happens and continues camping the border until point-out. Game ends with maybe 2 or 3 ships lost per side. God I hate what this game has become.
Although I'm a little more optimistic than you, you've made a lot of good points here. I still feel solid, thoughtful play can overcome many of these challenges (especially with team support - which is almost non-existent for the reasons you've listed), but this is a good breakdown of the reason that so many T9-10 matches are either over in 5m or mind-numbingly boring.
Ah, so it's a know one. I've had times before when all my shots land way short of a target sailing in a straight line, but wasn't entirely sure if I didn't potato the shot myself.
Stopped playing wows awhile ago for many reasons however i still enjoy your content and appreciate your skilled play and commentary. Thanks for this one Flamu Cheers and be safe.
I hate the Montana, in my opinion, she is the least enjoyable T10 BB, at least the least enjoyable compared to the others I have, I would rather take the Missouri to T10 than play the Montana.
Yes I like Iowa more.. I think a buff where it loses less speed in turns would be nice cause look at that huge sharp bow!! With al the Georgias and french bbs its sometimes impossible to run into stealth distance cause of that stupid speed boost
dude everytime I watch you you get these cruisers that just go in straight lines like do they not have PT on your server? whenever I try to shoot at a cruiser its like they have ESP and immediately do a sharp turn causing me a complete miss 80% of the time I try to take potshots.
Are we playing the same game?! I really like playing Iowa, but in my games these shots would not have been citadel after citadel... more like water and overpens... :D Keep it up Flamu!
Yeah that's what i was thinking, i only get overpens or ricochets, even at broadsides????? And that's when i'm lucky enough for my shells to not actively dodge the enemy...
@Henry if you lack consistency with the Georgia because of its armor you're not playing the ship right. you either are playing flanks and relying on your speed or the lack of the enemy's focus to create crossfires or you are playing up close with island cover and hoping to ambush someone.
'You should always try to win' - Yes this. I scream this at people all the time. Get involved, turn and fight, have fun. You never know you might go on a killing spree.
always seem to make my day with your Iowa gameplays Flamu. watching some of the first ships in the game still holding strong in the game currently gives me hope that WG isn't screwing EVERYTHING up in W.O.W. But it's mostly that I'm strongly biased towards the ship.
Average WG player: "find red dot, big guns go boom". Clueless players even at top tiers, apparently devoid of any understanding of how to win (nor caring) or even the strengths and weaknesses of their ship v those of the enemy ships (or tanks in WoT), was the last straw for me with WG titles, and I was only ~55% player (which puts you in a surprisingly high decile of all players I might add). Having played from Alpha through to release I could almost put up with lots of shitty mechanics, laughable 'balans' and tiresome spamming of nonsense ships etc etc, but not on top of so many battles where people have no fkn clue. Same with WoT, where I played from Beta in 2010 and finished after playing everything available including clan wars with a total of ~11k battles. The quality of players, and the calamitously bad for balance and transparently grasping releasing of premium ammo for in-game currency, finished that game for me way back in 2013. Kind of sad given I've played all sorts of REAL war games from SSI and Avalon Hill and other great and REAL game designers and thus loved the potential of these games only to watch WG chase the lowest common denominator again and again. I know, I ought not bother ranting, LOL, but seriously, watching so many of these players I'd really love to be able to pop up wherever they're playing and ask them to explain their thinking as I just don't understand how people enjoy failing terribly over and over and over.
Stating facts is not ranting.The sad part,is that WG could easily fix this,by simply changing MM.Put players with IQ equal of a toilet paper to play with same players.And let those who try at least to understand what to do in game,to play with the same as them.But simply WG dont want to for obvious reasons.We come to the point where BOTS are much more better and capable teammates,than the usual daily potato.Like it wasnt enough the notorious fuck up with CV rework,or the more and exciting-NOT-HE spamming,you have to play alongside players that think CAMO is a poisonous food and they avoid it at all costs
Iowa is always the fun and a good fast Battleship Iowa is good at Knocking Richelieu and Jean Bart’s Guns out like you in your last Iowa Video and I forget Iowa is a legend
Also, I dunno about the Minnesota, I haven't seen that many, but my subjective impression has been that the number of Kansas on a team are the best predictor that that team will lose. I mean, it's not guaranteed, they could still have an amazing player that carries the game, and so on. But if I see two Kansas on one team, and two ANYTHING ELSE than Kansas at the same tier on the opposite team, well, if I had to bet money, I'd bet on the team without Kansas. Now I'm probably not qualified to judge if it's the ship, or just that everyone who only played up to T5 (which is all that the directives required) now got a Kansas and feels a need to play it, or whatever, but that's my subjective impression.
I got my Kansas and grinded it solo. My WR was 40%. For comparison, I have over 60% WR on the Colorado and higher average damage, and I hate the Colorado. A friend got his Kansas and I joined his div for his first game (obviously I wasn't going to play any more Kansas since I had finished the grind), and in that game our team had 3 Kansas and the enemy team had 4. The enemy team lost, but the thing both teams had in common? The bottom 3 on both sides were all Kansas (bottom 4 for the enemy team). The ship is just ridiculously bad, I'd gladly take a Monarch over it anyday.
In World of Tanks there is a real downside to your tank getting blown up: your crew only gets half XP. Or at least it used to be like that years ago. I wouldn't be surprised if many players here coming from wot think this happens in wows as well.
I just was in the same scenario. I aim my sights smack back in the middle. 10 km range. Shells literally go 2 ways and hit the sea left and right side of the target. What is this?
@17:00 you are making a very accurate statement about the state of the game and I have been asking the exact same question. People either start to rush to the edge of the map and try to fall off it, or they try to climb thr mountains at A10 or they convene behind the smallest possible rock on the map for a mating ritual to create little baby ships. I do not understand for the sake of god why in some games 90% of my teammates give up on the game in minute one and would take a loss over a scratch to their precious ship. As if they owned an oldtimer they brought to an oldtimer convention and did not like what they see there. I do not get it.
If you love the challenge of playing in a tactical straightjacket and don't mind enforced boredom, then Minnesota is for you. The 23 knots makes sure the tactical straightjacket is cinched up tight and you can never escape, while the 40 second reload ruthlessly forces you to suffer from boredom. The only thing good about a 40 second reload is Flammu can eat lunch and play WOWS at the same time with any loss in effectiveness. But I have to say, I don't even enjoy watching a Minnesota stream. Boring is boring and no getting around it with Minnesota.
That´s because distances in WoWS are not 1:1 they are shorter than shown by the range indicators, approximately just 1/3 of the shown range. But it´s known for a long time, WG doesn´t mentioning it much like sigma values or penetration angles. The reason is: With real values the game would be feel much more like a slow simulation than an arcade game.
The problem with most of the early US BBs and the alternate BB line is that WG won't inflate their stats from history and the tactical and strategic concerns that gave rise to them aren't modeled. The US Dreadnaughts and Standards were built in a time where the USN was numerically inferior to the navies of equal tier powers and the US had to protect a large amount of the Pacific. To accomplish this, the USN designed their BBs to be able to fight as a single cohesive unit by standardizing their size, performance, and armaments so they could defeat numerically superior forces by fighting as essentially one massive ship. They also designed the ships to be slow in order to be as fuel efficient as possible so they could cruise from the West Coast to the Philippines with as few resupplies as possible. Unless smart players ever try using coordinated formation tactics (which I doubt) and/or WG implements a fuel mechanic (which they won't unless it is a p2w mechanic), the US slow BBs will be more or less pointless.
Iowa's dispersion is good enough to achieve that kind of thing but not good enough to do it consistently. Sometimes the RNG gods do give you salvo after salvo of good dispersion though.
You are correct, cruisers have to rely more on player ability than other classes. They lack the extremes in firepower, protection, and concealment, other types can depend on to be effective.
Iowa/Missouri have this advantage of just being decent and without gimmicks, they didn't need to be made special and unique they are just what they are, reasonable speedy, decent enough armour, solidly preforming guns. With a lot of new stuff something needs to be special about them and once that gimmick runs it course they suddenly can struggle.
@@stefanocrosazzo3262 its a tool that distinguishes her significantly, as it has a huge potential impact on the game unlike the gimmick of Massachusetts turrets having faster turret traverse compared to NC /Alabama/Iowa as that while nice to have doesn't change the course of game like radar does.
I think the Iowa is really undervalued these days. With the combination of speed, concealment and kinda reliable guns it is still my top choice, when playing a Tier IX Battleship. Also, I think people do exaggerate about how squishy it ist. Yes, if you show broadside, you will get citadeled, but if you keep the Iowa angeled - as you saw in this game - it really can tank a lot.
Honestly, I think the cruisers have started charging in because battleship won't anymore. The sitting back and sniping sure bothers me, and I often have to catch myself before I just charge in.
So Iowa is faster than Minnesota, it's tankier, it has better concealment, its guns have better penetration, better accuracy, better reload, and it has a better heal. Minnesota has marginally better AA and better maneuverability. Seems legit.
I get games like this... except I am not good enough to carry, and with teams that refuse to push, hides BEHIND spawn point etc, it always turns into a rout.
Dood, if I do that, I get HE spammed to death in one minute. I do not get it now Flamu gets these positions and not get focused on by everyone in range.
I just had a battle in my Seattle where an Akizuki sat in front of an enemy Musashi at 5 km, firing his guns and without using his torps even once. He didn't cap and he didn't spot. I had BBs push into crossfires and eventually I was the last one left alive. After hitting 196 shells I got 2 fires. Just absurdly bad time all around. The game has completely devolved into this state for some reason
that's kinda how akizuki plays, it has one torp launcher with a really long reload, and some of the worst concealment for it's tier. It's a really good gunboat, and not much else.
Akizuki, kitakaze and harugumo, all have 1 set of torps and it takes 2minutes and 40 seconds to reload so the guns are usually what this DD uses. It's a great gunboat can even outgun some cruisers.
Well, i bet you dont know what are Akizuki line. Launch torps and use TRB and u wait for 3 minutes (more or less). Akizuki to Harugumo only have 1 torpedo tubes and they are Gun Boat DD
Caping in Akizuki is chellanging because her concealment is not that great like Kagero. See the condition first before caping or said Akizuki is a bad player because not caping. Is there any CV in your game? then thats different story, what enemy DD that Akizuki face of? What enemies around cap? Radar ships or not?
I really really want to love the Iowa, but I just can't. It is the most cursed ship for me. Every single time when I am absolutely sure that I got a good volley off, it disappoints me. Every god damn time. And it is not like I don't know how to play BBs. Hell, I have unicum stats in the North Carolina, but Iowa is simply cursed. It was that way the first time I played through that line a few years ago, and it was still the same in the last few weeks, when I played through the line again because I reset them.
I feel you, I had that same problem.with the Sov. Soyuz. I did well in all ships until that thing and I had to skip it with freexp to get kremlin. That ship's guns where so trollish it felt worse then a Roma...
Flamu: "Lol Minnesota bad cause slow" Admiral Jingles: "The Minnesota isn't as good as Iowa but it is way better than Kansas and it leads to Vermont, which should be good for competitive play because of these reasons" I personally love the Minnesota and have done pretty good in it. I will agree the Kansas is trash though.
Wargaming missed their chance with these new battleships. Nothing wrong with slow as they as you know how to make they game last (and coming off Colorado, you'd think most player will have learned the lesson about biding their time). But being covered head to toe in vulnerable thin plating doesn't do them any favours, and the lack of short cooldown abilities hurts. These should have been brawlers. Bigger-than-average guns, high penetration secondaries, efficient damage repair and damage control.
Yeah, it baffles me that you lose all the advantages of the lower-tier dreadnoughts (decent belt armor, no superstructure, excellent deck armor), you get punished for having an extra turret with longer reload, then you get punished _again_ with bad accuracy, and finally you get the poor speed. You keep all the bad stuff as is, lose all of the good stuff and then get some extra punishment on top of that. I don't know why they created a line just to hate it.
@@Snagabott It seems like direction shifted halfway through development. I reckon they _were_ going to be brawlers (low speed and shotgun dispersion suggest a methodical drive-by style), but then somebody realized twelve 18" guns slapping you in the face is a little nasty, so they tried to turn them into snipers kinda? These ships just have no identity.
@@dylanwight5764 Maybe. Brawling isn't really viable on T10 with ships that slow... as a brawler, you need a bit of time for things to settle down before you can move in (otherwise you just get focused and die as many a GK or Krem has found out the hard way), but when you're that slow it doesn't really work. I think they just put an over-emphasis on alpha, thinking that alpha was more important than DPM. That may sometimes be true in competitive; but, honestly, in competitive, speed is more important than in randoms too, so it would still be a very tough trade-off to make.
@@Snagabott Oklahoma, California and Florida all seem out of place too. This whole line feels like a serious rush job, almost like filler while they work on the Italian battleships.
Minnesota doesn't have Colordo guns.... Minnesota has 45 cal. Mk7 guns Colordo has 45 cal. Mk5 guns Minnesota guns are Iowa guns @45 cal not 50cal , only difference is that Iowa fire Mk 8 "Super-heavy" shells where Minnesota would fire mk5 shells (same as Colordo).
@@jayvee8502 the mk1 would of been replaced in the modernisation of 1930s. ( just like Colordo from mk1 to mk5 ) Which these ships are, thats why they look like bigger California. just like Colordo from mk1 to mk5 .
I never understand the people that play to survive (in the end loss). If you get destroyed you lose, but if you don't kill them you lose. There isn't enough time to get caps, you might as well die trying and have another 3% or whatever on your service cost.
Most of record breaking games are close defeats, or more rarely, close wins. Mine (384k Yama) was basically last second RNG pull towards our win with dev strike on a CV. How often have I dev struck a CV afterwards? 0 times.
Helpfull Video sadly i dont feel the iowa at all. I cant seem to hit and if its only 1 shell thats either riccochet or whatever... very rarely cits even on broadside targets rng goes everywere... i fight so hard but i rarely get over 50-70k dmg with it (i think i do in the middle around 51k per btl.)... (at least i know how to stay alive and fight with it now after 66 battles though haha...)
"you dont pay extra" - wrong. "you always pay extra" - right You pay full repair/service regardless if you survive with 100% or 1% with all heals used.
Here's the thing, Flamu. There are certain ships that are bad on paper, but there are also people can manage to make these ships work. I enjoyed the Izumo (grinded through it 3-4 years ago, way before it got any buff at all), FDG, Colorado etc. while most others despise them. And while there are certain ships that are good on paper, some people can't make them work either. After regrinding USN BB line for 5 times, fought hundreds of battles, I still found the NC (that you super fond of) the least favourable ship in the entire line. Even though I can manage to play the NC decently (56% WR over 200+ battles), I still hate this ship for the ridiculous shell arc. So, return to your hatred (or despise?) to the new USN BB line, I found myself neutral with the Kansas. Yes, she is a mediocre ship, but not unplayable. I have 56% WR over 20+ battles with her now, by playing stupid HE spam from 20km+. It's stupid, but it worked. I don't have the Minnesota yet, but I found her armor scheme is pretty decent against AP shells, and with the options in the 6th upgrade slot, I'm sure the long range HE spam strategy will work even better> My point is, as a CC, you can surely give your opinion on a certain ship, but don't be too fixate on it. I hate to see a serie of videos just to look down on a line of ships. These ships are on the released stage, which means their stats will not be changed anytime soon. So why make a rant about it? Could you please focus more on how to make them work?
Ya it seems the majority think the ships SUCK ASS, they dont but trying telling that to the meta/op ship herd. The only thing i HATE about Kansas the ACCURACY, a shotgun would be more accurate at times, Jingle recently uploaded replay of the Minnesota and she seems to HAVE the accuracy you would expect of a US BB, plus the 38mm plating is nice. still havent seen Vermont a lot but 12 457s and THICC FULL PLATE ARMOR, what can possibly go wrong right?
If you have a problem with NC, the problem is you. If someone has a problem with Kansas, the problem is (at least partly) the ship. That's what you watch Flamu for: he plays well, so when he says there is a problem with the ship, you can be confident that is actually the case, and the problem is not in fact with him. We all have our preferences, and he is no exception, but you even admit that you are able to get decent results out of NC; the only issue with her is that she doesn't match your preferences. Izumo and Colorado would be cases of the average player being the problem, because they have always performed fine. That seems not to be the case with the fat USN BBs, for reasons Flamu explained. Tough luck. Are you honestly suggesting playing those as 20km HE spammers? Is that the best possible way to wring some kind of performance out of them? Not that it is actually likely, because your "20+ battles" sample is nowhere near statistically significant, but even if it were... In that case why play those rather than, you know, anything else?
If flamu makes a comparison between the two tier X and suggests that Vermont is not quite worth the grinding and suffering, then I have no objection at all. But why bother make all the comparison between the two tier VIII and IX, as if they were the goal of grinding? Like, Kansas and Minnesota both suck, you should not aim to own it? Obviously Iowa and NC are the better ships. But we still have to grind through Kansas and Minnesota to get to the tier X, and I see no point in comparing the tier VIII and IX ships.
Realizing I had tanked more health than the Minnesota theoretical maximum at the end was just depressing. Vermont has to be ridiculous to justify the Kansas and Minnesota, but I'm not sure how much of a good thing that would be. Two Free XP dumps and a silly 457mm monster? idk, we'll see once I get to test it.
Stream: www.twitch.tv/flamuu
Insta: instagram.com/flamugram/
Twitter: twitter.com/flamuchz
Discord: discord.gg/Flamu
I’ve heard bad things about Vermont’s AP. Very bad things. Same-pen-as-Richelieu, things, since they’re WW1 guns and shells. I desperately hope that’s wrong.
Vermont doesn't need a good grind to justify it. It's a T10 ship that's actually really good. It is its own justification.
Looked like a good match though your team didn't appear to be concerned about holding any of the caps. If you held at least one cap, the point spread could have been in your teams favor.
@@Cailus3542 nope you very wrong that is Oklahoma not Vermont shell,Vermont shell have better shell speed and long range penetration than Ohio
1.5 sigma is too underwhelming.I mean,what is the point of 12 guns if you cant hit targets with them.
I haven't even watched the video yet, but I need to say that the Minnesota is perfect for my clan leader. He has a suicide issue in most of his fast ships, but he can't suicide if the battle is already over by the time he gets there.
Dude should stay at low tier US and RN BBs 😅
yo ngl thats sorta relatable
@@mattmac4087 it’s not like he’s a low skill player. He’s a very good DD player. He just doesn’t play bbs often so try’s to brawl in them too often
@@med7940 I don't think he reads the comment sections of these videos so we'll see.
Edit: Nvm I've been pinged in the Discord.
I relate to this too much.... in my GK I am dead 5 min in the game. However I always manage to take a ship or 2, sometimes 3 with me. I just play dds to much. Love my Daring
Interesting, the US Battleship line is a better version of the new US FATtleship line, thanks WG
Fattleship! Hahahaha! ROFL! Good one! 😂
🤦 omg.
Kansas , Minnesota , Vermont are all 1930's designs that were cancelled due to the Washington treaty of the 1920's .
These battleships would of been part of New Hampshire-Class dreadnoughts an these ones in the game are the refit version thats why they look like bigger Uss California.
Other design features were 8x20inch guns.
Nth Carliona , Sth Dakota an Iowa were all desighn of fast battleships that "escalator clause" of the secound London Naval Treaty due to Japan refusal to commit to it.
Nth Carliona went though 50 designs an was intended to have 12x14 inch guns, but was given 16inch guns instead.
Players: Buff the old lines!
WG: OKay( add a new crappy line that make the original line looks good as hell
Nice pun.
Ya know, now that I think about it..I think with the new "Fattleship" line for the US BB tree, its further reinforcing the stereotype of most American's being fat! XD Rofl. Coincidence? WG might be pulling out an inside joke here. ROFL.
I think the reason players seem to have “lost their patience” is that many people want to play a fun arcade game, and some want to play a strategic game. Problem is that the game does neither well, with historical stats meaning the sum total of jack. I wrote a long diatribe about German Battleships and UK Cruisers, but I realised it boiled down to this; some ships are superior, and you realise it going into battle. When you’re in a sub par/terrible ship, and it’s also a bottom tier ship, aka Albermarle in tier 10 matches, what can you do? You have something like 15.8km range when it’s absolutely maxed, meanwhile there are destroyers with that range in tier 10! Your guns fire barely twice as fast as most battleships, it they hit for 3x the damage. Your armour is paper.
It’s not that you can’t effect the battle, but a lot of people hate a slow passive play style that is utterly unlike real life. So they just say “screw it” and lose all regard for their ship. It’s because they constantly end up bottom tier, or see the team folding. Why waste the next 20 minutes behind a rock barely getting 30,000 damage?
TBH, I'm not even sure if it's that complicated thinking or an actual decision to just throw the game without WG making them pink. I think for some it's simply as Hanlon's Razor says: "Never attribute to malice, that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
On the Tuesday when the US BBs part 1 came out, I noticed stuff like a DD opening fire with the guns from like 6km on three FULL HEALTH enemy cruisers, they don't even as much fight him as give him an execution by firing squad. I talk about it on the clan TS and hypothesize that the guy must have had a directive to do damage with a DD and no sense on how to do it. Later I group up with a clan mate who is a nice guy but... not good at the game, to put it VERY mildly, and unlike your average case of Dunning-Kruger, he actually realizes it. Then to my horror, I see him doing just that verbatim in his DD. I literally only had time to go, "For the love of boobs, please DON'T start shooting DD guns at cruisers point-blank!" on TS before he exploded. His answer? "But I can't just sail around! I have to do damage for the directive!" Derp.
So, eh, there you go. Some people don't actually plan to throw in the towel, so to speak, but just are THAT bad at the game.
@@NegotiatorGladiarius I don't see the problem with shooting DD guns at cruisers...depending on the DD and cruiser, you can rack up dozens of citadels and do some amazing damage that way.
I typically finish off CLs with guns after a successful torpedostrike.
And I have a 58% winrate...
@@Chrinik Yes, well, that still assumes stuff like AP, that thing being chunked by torps first, and/or making sure their guns are in the wrong direction. Both guys I was talking about started shooting HE at a group of full health CAs at the start of the game. I mean, the first guy didn't even try to torp first (was a russian DD, so their torp range isn't that great), while my clan mate did try to torp, missed (I swear that guy could miss a barn from the inside), then just switched to shooting HE at full health CAs. That's... not quite as sane a choice as what you describe, to say the least.
@@NegotiatorGladiarius No, it indeed is not....unless you are a japanese gunboat with cover/ a path to escape...no...
@@NegotiatorGladiarius people with that IQ level should be banned from the game. Think about how much better the game would be if those braindead players (specially dd players) get banned from randoms for 1-2 battles if they die before the 5 min mark
I love the fact that the Iowa’s guns in WW2 were so accurate irl that when the USN refitted her, they
kept the analog firing system
as a minnesotan this title triggered me. iowa has corn and nothing more
And a better battleship. A much better one.
We have a lot of hogs as well.
better political taste too.
I agree Lol
Lol
I should have read some comments.
I posted almost the same thing. Heh
"These are the kind of guys that don't know the ingredients for peanut butter and jelly, know what I'm sayin?" -Dunkey
What's especially infuriating is that the Minnesota didn't have to be as bad as it is. If you look up the specifications for the Tillman/Maximum Battleships designs, ALL of them mounted either the 406/50s or the 457mm guns. Both the Minnesota and the Kansas were gimped from the start, and for seemingly no good reason. Hell, all of the designs had a minimum top speed of 25 knots. As someone who got lucky and got the Minnesota, I can say that if it had the better guns and slightly better top speed, it could've been a legitimate option to Iowa, albeit with many asterisks.
What a shame. I feel bad for the art team and WG. So much time and effort for a waste of space and time.
I have a feeling they were made this way because it was determined that the specs were unobtainable for the time they were designed. When you read the other Tilmann designs they just start to get silly with the number of guns per turret, 6. These designs were very much WW1 designs. Once we got involved in a war in the Pacific there would have been no way to keep these ships fueled up as well as their escorts and carriers when looked at from the perspective in Neptune's Inferno. I'm looking forward to these ships going silver so I can finally sell them for credits.
Minnesota and Kansas aren’t Tillman’s their two different versions of the same class the 1920’s SD. Kansas is a Pearl Harbor version of a 1920’s SD while Minnesota is an even more modernized version. They had the 406/50’s or the MK2.
In fact since the USN had the guns lying around since the 20’s SD and the Lexington’s got scrapped, they were planned to be used on the Iowa class. until the buero of ordnance fucked up the turrets by making their designs too small to fit the guns. So their choices were either completely redesign the hull of the ship or design new guns.
Anyway the 1920’s SD had a top speed of 23knots, the speed that you should be complaining about is the Vermont since that is a “modified” Tillman I design. But since WG doesn’t know how to read the historical documents that are online For Free, they killed the Kansas by giving her the Colorado’s guns and killed the Minnesota by giving her the wrong guns again and the gave her a shell that the hoists on the ship couldn’t physically take so they could keep the high tier US BB’s from having a shell travel time over 800mps.
You forgot they need better armor as well
@@beedrillbot121 Minesota should have the 16" 50 Mark 1. Also the reload is ridiculous. With a 30 sec reload this should have helped the ship.
@@jayvee8502 um the Mk 2 is the same thing as the 406/50 that the 1920’s SD were intended to be equipped with.
@Rick rolled bitch personally I think they should’ve made it so HE doesn’t deal HP damage or have the ability to cause fires on the ship if they hit the torpedo budge, until the torpedo budge has been saturated.
Tier 8+ players never want to move up or push until the 'brain rot' takes over after about 10 minutes and most players become very impatient, and usually, they think the game is either definitely won or lost at that point so their plays no long matter. For many though they remain passive the entire match all too often.
There are two big reasons for this, one is just the simple deterioration of the playerbase, which is easy enough to figure out.
The second is brought about by the rampant and unchecked power creep creating an environment that is simply too hostile to all ship classes (except for 1, and we all know which it is!)
DDs don't want to push because of the completely broken, one-sided exchange of rocket planes vs. DDs, the fact that Radar is WAY too common now, and that there are many other DDs that will delete you in a hopeless fight if you stumble upon them (Daring, Kitakaze/Harugumo, etc)
CAs don't want to push because of stupidly accurate and destructive BBs that have incredible range and great accuracy combined with common plate overmatch. When it was only Yammy, this was tolerable. Then came Republique. Then Kreml. Then Thunderer. Then Georgia. Then Ohio and Shikishima and Slava, jesus christ man! New AP bombs from Richtoffen haven't helped at all either (hey i'm just gonna fly over and hit for 28k citadel damage, and there's fuck-all you can do about it have fun!)
BBs don't want to push due to the insanely cancerous HE spam meta thanks to the likes of Smolensk and lesser offenders such as Harugumo, Wooster, Friesland, AlNevski. While they try to dodge this they also contend with endless walls of insanely fast torps from the Pan-Asian and Pan-Europe DDs that are impossible to dodge on reaction.
CVs are the only ones who get to have fun any more, and it shows. The end result is that everyone sits back in spawn just hoping the enemy team will be stupid enough to make a mistake first. I've played WAY too many matches of Epicentre mode lately where one team grabs the points unopposed with 1 or 2 DDs and the other team just lets it happens and continues camping the border until point-out. Game ends with maybe 2 or 3 ships lost per side.
God I hate what this game has become.
Although I'm a little more optimistic than you, you've made a lot of good points here. I still feel solid, thoughtful play can overcome many of these challenges (especially with team support - which is almost non-existent for the reasons you've listed), but this is a good breakdown of the reason that so many T9-10 matches are either over in 5m or mind-numbingly boring.
Shell landing short bug right there at 8:57. WeeGee can keep denying it LOL
Ah, so it's a know one. I've had times before when all my shots land way short of a target sailing in a straight line, but wasn't entirely sure if I didn't potato the shot myself.
That explains some of my more... questionable misses, lol.
Stopped playing wows awhile ago for many reasons however i still enjoy your content and appreciate your skilled play and commentary. Thanks for this one Flamu Cheers and be safe.
i feel like an iowa with a buffed ROF and HP pool would have been a better t10 ship than the montana sometimes.
I hate the Montana, in my opinion, she is the least enjoyable T10 BB, at least the least enjoyable compared to the others I have, I would rather take the Missouri to T10 than play the Montana.
I wouldnt mins seeing a tier10 iowa class
I agree, I was very exited for Monty until I played Iowa. The speed, small bow profile, and lower rudder shift was very fun!
Yes I like Iowa more.. I think a buff where it loses less speed in turns would be nice cause look at that huge sharp bow!! With al the Georgias and french bbs its sometimes impossible to run into stealth distance cause of that stupid speed boost
Hmm, thoughts on a new tier 10 battleship?
Montana sucks in my opinion, while players could make it work, it’s simply not as worth it.
I love CVs. CVs ALWAYS have the high ground.
Hello there.
Hello there
Edit: fuck, beaten
Literally
CVs are just like Grievous...you need to cut all their claws in order to stop them from attacking you
GENERAL KENOBI
dude everytime I watch you you get these cruisers that just go in straight lines like do they not have PT on your server? whenever I try to shoot at a cruiser its like they have ESP and immediately do a sharp turn causing me a complete miss 80% of the time I try to take potshots.
Are we playing the same game?! I really like playing Iowa, but in my games these shots would not have been citadel after citadel... more like water and overpens... :D Keep it up Flamu!
Yeah that's what i was thinking, i only get overpens or ricochets, even at broadsides????? And that's when i'm lucky enough for my shells to not actively dodge the enemy...
Based Flamu
Yeah completely agree, Iowa is one of the worst tier 9s in the game
@@aceca5147 what about izumo?
@@AreiaMercurius well izumo got buffed quite a bit from release. Iowa is ONE of the worst ;)
Why should I bother playing Minnesota or Iowa when I can play Georgia
because it leads to tier X and enables you to play clan battles and goes towards the research bureau?
@@zacharyjackson1829 stupid question.
@Henry WG changed the fire RNG on the Georgia. It did have good dispersion when it came out.
@Henry if you lack consistency with the Georgia because of its armor you're not playing the ship right. you either are playing flanks and relying on your speed or the lack of the enemy's focus to create crossfires or you are playing up close with island cover and hoping to ambush someone.
georgia is good what you expect when you play it often after iowa both good ships
Iowa is still the best looking Battleship in my opinion
Yes its sexy but I gotta put Tirpitz on number 1
For me Iowa looks like a slimmer Yamato. Also Yamato looks like an upscaled South Dakota class BB.
Dunkerque does it for me
'You should always try to win' - Yes this. I scream this at people all the time. Get involved, turn and fight, have fun. You never know you might go on a killing spree.
always seem to make my day with your Iowa gameplays Flamu. watching some of the first ships in the game still holding strong in the game currently gives me hope that WG isn't screwing EVERYTHING up in W.O.W. But it's mostly that I'm strongly biased towards the ship.
Flamu, thanks for the video. Do you show, somewhere, your captain build for this ship after the new skills in-game? Thanks mate!
Average WG player: "find red dot, big guns go boom".
Clueless players even at top tiers, apparently devoid of any understanding of how to win (nor caring) or even the strengths and weaknesses of their ship v those of the enemy ships (or tanks in WoT), was the last straw for me with WG titles, and I was only ~55% player (which puts you in a surprisingly high decile of all players I might add).
Having played from Alpha through to release I could almost put up with lots of shitty mechanics, laughable 'balans' and tiresome spamming of nonsense ships etc etc, but not on top of so many battles where people have no fkn clue.
Same with WoT, where I played from Beta in 2010 and finished after playing everything available including clan wars with a total of ~11k battles. The quality of players, and the calamitously bad for balance and transparently grasping releasing of premium ammo for in-game currency, finished that game for me way back in 2013.
Kind of sad given I've played all sorts of REAL war games from SSI and Avalon Hill and other great and REAL game designers and thus loved the potential of these games only to watch WG chase the lowest common denominator again and again.
I know, I ought not bother ranting, LOL, but seriously, watching so many of these players I'd really love to be able to pop up wherever they're playing and ask them to explain their thinking as I just don't understand how people enjoy failing terribly over and over and over.
Stating facts is not ranting.The sad part,is that WG could easily fix this,by simply changing MM.Put players with IQ equal of a toilet paper to play with same players.And let those who try at least to understand what to do in game,to play with the same as them.But simply WG dont want to for obvious reasons.We come to the point where BOTS are much more better and capable teammates,than the usual daily potato.Like it wasnt enough the notorious fuck up with CV rework,or the more and exciting-NOT-HE spamming,you have to play alongside players that think CAMO is a poisonous food and they avoid it at all costs
It looks so weird how fast the turrets turn and they turn perfectly together
You need to look for a doctor, Flamu. All this carrying is hurting your back!
People don't focus fire a DD unless I am captaining it. then I get an entire team shooting at me.
I know how that feels.
Iowa is always the fun and a good fast Battleship Iowa is good at Knocking Richelieu and Jean Bart’s Guns out like you in your last Iowa Video and I forget Iowa is a legend
Also, I dunno about the Minnesota, I haven't seen that many, but my subjective impression has been that the number of Kansas on a team are the best predictor that that team will lose. I mean, it's not guaranteed, they could still have an amazing player that carries the game, and so on. But if I see two Kansas on one team, and two ANYTHING ELSE than Kansas at the same tier on the opposite team, well, if I had to bet money, I'd bet on the team without Kansas. Now I'm probably not qualified to judge if it's the ship, or just that everyone who only played up to T5 (which is all that the directives required) now got a Kansas and feels a need to play it, or whatever, but that's my subjective impression.
I got my Kansas and grinded it solo. My WR was 40%. For comparison, I have over 60% WR on the Colorado and higher average damage, and I hate the Colorado. A friend got his Kansas and I joined his div for his first game (obviously I wasn't going to play any more Kansas since I had finished the grind), and in that game our team had 3 Kansas and the enemy team had 4. The enemy team lost, but the thing both teams had in common? The bottom 3 on both sides were all Kansas (bottom 4 for the enemy team). The ship is just ridiculously bad, I'd gladly take a Monarch over it anyday.
I love the radar cruisers that pop radar while they are still near the spawn. And it mostly happens when I’m playing a DD. FML
The 360 no scope on the Ibuki was very satisfying to watch.
I just unlocked my first IX, the Iowa. Thanks for the tips!
In World of Tanks there is a real downside to your tank getting blown up: your crew only gets half XP. Or at least it used to be like that years ago. I wouldn't be surprised if many players here coming from wot think this happens in wows as well.
Probably explains the passive play back in the day -_-
hell im amazed their isnt a bonus for surviving the battle. but that works too.
1:59 Why does that happen? I was in same situation before but I only got overpen.
I just was in the same scenario. I aim my sights smack back in the middle. 10 km range. Shells literally go 2 ways and hit the sea left and right side of the target. What is this?
Hmm... Could it be because of gun modification?
Look, no cv and it's so much fun to play! Nice gameplay as always Flamu!
gimmick of t9
@17:00 you are making a very accurate statement about the state of the game and I have been asking the exact same question. People either start to rush to the edge of the map and try to fall off it, or they try to climb thr mountains at A10 or they convene behind the smallest possible rock on the map for a mating ritual to create little baby ships. I do not understand for the sake of god why in some games 90% of my teammates give up on the game in minute one and would take a loss over a scratch to their precious ship. As if they owned an oldtimer they brought to an oldtimer convention and did not like what they see there. I do not get it.
2:15 And This. Why do I sometimes get wrecked for 25000 damage but sometimes do not? Like in this case.
"Iowa is a better Minnesota".
WG: "So what you're saying is, we need to nerf the Iowa to hell?"
Ouch xD let's hope they not do that.
Iowa is fine as is, no nerf or buff needes
Petition to buff Iowa’s armor to 342 mm?
If you love the challenge of playing in a tactical straightjacket and don't mind enforced boredom, then Minnesota is for you. The 23 knots makes sure the tactical straightjacket is cinched up tight and you can never escape, while the 40 second reload ruthlessly forces you to suffer from boredom. The only thing good about a 40 second reload is Flammu can eat lunch and play WOWS at the same time with any loss in effectiveness. But I have to say, I don't even enjoy watching a Minnesota stream. Boring is boring and no getting around it with Minnesota.
I think the most important advantage is that Iowa looks so much better. Long, sleek, kinda skinny. Minnesota is literally a floating brick
Oof.
He's killed two of the 7 dead enemies and says "...I NEED to get kills because no one else seems to be getting them."
Oh, C'MON man, lol.
As a minnesotan I can confirm this
So many thing that I hope the Legends team learns from PC, to optimize it, reduce the BS, keep it balanced, etc.
0:13 Why load HE?
I thought this video was about the states, and boy did I have some words for you!
Long story short is along the lines of: Iowa loses 3 guns in order to gain just about everything else
I really appreciate that you go through and delete all the adds youtube shoves into the video.
^ This. Very underappreciated thing Flolo does.
You traveled 53 km's in less than 20 minutes. I knew Iowa was fast but that's FAST! I mean, more than 150 km/h of AVERAGE speed!!
That´s because distances in WoWS are not 1:1 they are shorter than shown by the range indicators, approximately just 1/3 of the shown range. But it´s known for a long time, WG doesn´t mentioning it much like sigma values or penetration angles. The reason is: With real values the game would be feel much more like a slow simulation than an arcade game.
WG made every ship/plane/torpedo 5.2 times faster. Which is how planes go through 6km of AA in
Creating cross fire angles in a central position is the toughest thing i find.
Getting into a central position without being focused by every red ship is the problem i have.
Hey Flamu - would the Mo be as comparable here, to the Iowa?
The problem with most of the early US BBs and the alternate BB line is that WG won't inflate their stats from history and the tactical and strategic concerns that gave rise to them aren't modeled.
The US Dreadnaughts and Standards were built in a time where the USN was numerically inferior to the navies of equal tier powers and the US had to protect a large amount of the Pacific. To accomplish this, the USN designed their BBs to be able to fight as a single cohesive unit by standardizing their size, performance, and armaments so they could defeat numerically superior forces by fighting as essentially one massive ship. They also designed the ships to be slow in order to be as fuel efficient as possible so they could cruise from the West Coast to the Philippines with as few resupplies as possible.
Unless smart players ever try using coordinated formation tactics (which I doubt) and/or WG implements a fuel mechanic (which they won't unless it is a p2w mechanic), the US slow BBs will be more or less pointless.
Flamu, will you ever do a live gameplay commentary in the future?
is it just a replay thing where it doesnt show the full crosshair? or is there a way to get your crosshair to look like this?
If Minnesota is 555 Iowa is 666
Rng made me leave this game along with its lack of pve content, but its always nice seeing someone stick through it.
Flamu how did you manage to add the Slava disperssion on the Iowa ? Leave some citadels for the rest of us lol.
Iowa's dispersion is good enough to achieve that kind of thing but not good enough to do it consistently. Sometimes the RNG gods do give you salvo after salvo of good dispersion though.
As a Minnesotan, this cuts deeply.
Tf that Citadel just ignored any angles whatsoever
This the new potbs update?
Wargaming made the USN standard line, which was immediately powercrept by the US fast battleship line, which is an initial release line LMFAO.
...what
feels California man . exe
You are correct, cruisers have to rely more on player ability than other classes. They lack the extremes in firepower, protection, and concealment, other types can depend on to be effective.
Iowa/Missouri have this advantage of just being decent and without gimmicks, they didn't need to be made special and unique they are just what they are, reasonable speedy, decent enough armour, solidly preforming guns.
With a lot of new stuff something needs to be special about them and once that gimmick runs it course they suddenly can struggle.
“Gimmicks”
Artillery Plotting Room Module 2: Am I a joke to you?
Missouri has radar
If that is not a gimmick, what else is then?
@@stefanocrosazzo3262 its a tool that distinguishes her significantly, as it has a huge potential impact on the game unlike the gimmick of Massachusetts turrets having faster turret traverse compared to NC /Alabama/Iowa as that while nice to have doesn't change the course of game like radar does.
Can you do a stats comparison for the Vermont and the monti please?
I think the Iowa is really undervalued these days. With the combination of speed, concealment and kinda reliable guns it is still my top choice, when playing a Tier IX Battleship.
Also, I think people do exaggerate about how squishy it ist. Yes, if you show broadside, you will get citadeled, but if you keep the Iowa angeled - as you saw in this game - it really can tank a lot.
8:25 If this was a Minnesota play, it would have ended there, as soon the Pommern got you in the range of his secondaries
Is this Wargamings way of buffing and spotlighting the og US BB line?
We just need another Iowa USS Wisconsin-1991
Honestly, I think the cruisers have started charging in because battleship won't anymore. The sitting back and sniping sure bothers me, and I often have to catch myself before I just charge in.
So Iowa is faster than Minnesota, it's tankier, it has better concealment, its guns have better penetration, better accuracy, better reload, and it has a better heal.
Minnesota has marginally better AA and better maneuverability.
Seems legit.
+ Minnesota has a higher alpha strike *potential*
@@thelvadam2884 Theoretically, yes. In practice, short of point blank range, no.
Is it possible for there to be a "worse Minnesota"?
Why DM Donskoi is too ıp? I cant also kill it with any battleship, I get overpens in the best salvo
I get games like this... except I am not good enough to carry, and with teams that refuse to push, hides BEHIND spawn point etc, it always turns into a rout.
Amazing game flamu!!
Show us some zao gameplay soon
Pls
Ahh yeah nothing beats the big stick! ✊🏻
Murica!
I would’ve been interesting if she actually got to engage the Tirpitz or Yamato in battle.
Really miss having that concealment on Montana :( sucks that 14 is as low as she'll go.
the name of the teammate kitikaze that torped his own teammate ostergoland is actually in Chinese pinyin, which means “classmate Zhang”
Did you and jingles plan this? 😂 He releases a video on how bad the other ship is and you post a video on the Iowa!
Dood, if I do that, I get HE spammed to death in one minute. I do not get it now Flamu gets these positions and not get focused on by everyone in range.
I think he plays mainly on the RU server. They have strange strategies compared to EU and NA.
I just had a battle in my Seattle where an Akizuki sat in front of an enemy Musashi at 5 km, firing his guns and without using his torps even once. He didn't cap and he didn't spot. I had BBs push into crossfires and eventually I was the last one left alive. After hitting 196 shells I got 2 fires. Just absurdly bad time all around. The game has completely devolved into this state for some reason
that's kinda how akizuki plays, it has one torp launcher with a really long reload, and some of the worst concealment for it's tier. It's a really good gunboat, and not much else.
Akizuki, kitakaze and harugumo, all have 1 set of torps and it takes 2minutes and 40 seconds to reload so the guns are usually what this DD uses. It's a great gunboat can even outgun some cruisers.
Well, i bet you dont know what are Akizuki line. Launch torps and use TRB and u wait for 3 minutes (more or less). Akizuki to Harugumo only have 1 torpedo tubes and they are Gun Boat DD
Caping in Akizuki is chellanging because her concealment is not that great like Kagero. See the condition first before caping or said Akizuki is a bad player because not caping. Is there any CV in your game? then thats different story, what enemy DD that Akizuki face of? What enemies around cap? Radar ships or not?
tbh, Play Harugumo, Khabarovsk and Kleber lines like playing a light cruiser instead of a torps DD. Dont hope too much for them to caping or spotting
Iowa, La Fantasque, or Neptune as my next ship?
WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SHIP AND A BOAT?
One has guns
Iowa is slick while Minnesota is Thicc
I wonder if the trying to not take damage to save money comes from players who came from WOT?
"Speed is Life."
I just wish we had this 33knots rather than 30 on legends
I really really want to love the Iowa, but I just can't. It is the most cursed ship for me. Every single time when I am absolutely sure that I got a good volley off, it disappoints me. Every god damn time. And it is not like I don't know how to play BBs. Hell, I have unicum stats in the North Carolina, but Iowa is simply cursed. It was that way the first time I played through that line a few years ago, and it was still the same in the last few weeks, when I played through the line again because I reset them.
I feel you, I had that same problem.with the Sov. Soyuz. I did well in all ships until that thing and I had to skip it with freexp to get kremlin. That ship's guns where so trollish it felt worse then a Roma...
3:25 I just dont understand why my shots like these will end up doing 3k damage
Flamu’s iowa has slava dispersions. Broken Af
Apparently by reading through comments I am not the only one thinking so. CC buff is real
That's actually pretty standard Iowa dispersion tbh, and nowhere near what Slava puts out lol
@@elgar7252 i guess dispersion do vary from play to player lol
@@monarchy-5623 No not really. Players just remember their worst experience in games more than their best. It's natural.
@@elgar7252 I have 1000+ games in missouri I know it
@@monarchy-5623 Missouri's dispersion is worse than Iowa's. Even though they are both Iowa-Class, they do not have the same stats.
If the Iowa is a better Minnesota then why does it have 3 not 4 16" turrets?
Flamu: "Lol Minnesota bad cause slow"
Admiral Jingles: "The Minnesota isn't as good as Iowa but it is way better than Kansas and it leads to Vermont, which should be good for competitive play because of these reasons"
I personally love the Minnesota and have done pretty good in it. I will agree the Kansas is trash though.
I always fight for the win. I don't care about winning or losing percentages, I always go for the win. So, I die a lot lol.
Wargaming missed their chance with these new battleships. Nothing wrong with slow as they as you know how to make they game last (and coming off Colorado, you'd think most player will have learned the lesson about biding their time). But being covered head to toe in vulnerable thin plating doesn't do them any favours, and the lack of short cooldown abilities hurts.
These should have been brawlers. Bigger-than-average guns, high penetration secondaries, efficient damage repair and damage control.
Yeah, it baffles me that you lose all the advantages of the lower-tier dreadnoughts (decent belt armor, no superstructure, excellent deck armor), you get punished for having an extra turret with longer reload, then you get punished _again_ with bad accuracy, and finally you get the poor speed. You keep all the bad stuff as is, lose all of the good stuff and then get some extra punishment on top of that.
I don't know why they created a line just to hate it.
@@Snagabott It seems like direction shifted halfway through development. I reckon they _were_ going to be brawlers (low speed and shotgun dispersion suggest a methodical drive-by style), but then somebody realized twelve 18" guns slapping you in the face is a little nasty, so they tried to turn them into snipers kinda? These ships just have no identity.
@@dylanwight5764 Maybe. Brawling isn't really viable on T10 with ships that slow... as a brawler, you need a bit of time for things to settle down before you can move in (otherwise you just get focused and die as many a GK or Krem has found out the hard way), but when you're that slow it doesn't really work.
I think they just put an over-emphasis on alpha, thinking that alpha was more important than DPM. That may sometimes be true in competitive; but, honestly, in competitive, speed is more important than in randoms too, so it would still be a very tough trade-off to make.
@@Snagabott Oklahoma, California and Florida all seem out of place too. This whole line feels like a serious rush job, almost like filler while they work on the Italian battleships.
You seem to get the best team players?
Minnesota doesn't have Colordo guns....
Minnesota has 45 cal. Mk7 guns
Colordo has 45 cal. Mk5 guns
Minnesota guns are Iowa guns @45 cal not 50cal , only difference is that Iowa fire
Mk 8 "Super-heavy" shells where Minnesota would fire mk5 shells (same as Colordo).
They have the gun wrong on Minesota They should have the 16" 50 cal. Mk 1.
@@jayvee8502 the mk1 would of been replaced in the modernisation of 1930s.
( just like Colordo from mk1 to mk5 )
Which these ships are, thats why they look like bigger California.
just like Colordo from mk1 to mk5 .
@@xagentofchaos_8783 But the 16""/50 MK.1 has the testing data. WG should have used that.
In fairness I think the FdG was going for the ram against that Pommern.
...yes? And that was stupid
there is no "fairness". that dumbass tried to ram a BB with torps
I never understand the people that play to survive (in the end loss). If you get destroyed you lose, but if you don't kill them you lose. There isn't enough time to get caps, you might as well die trying and have another 3% or whatever on your service cost.
Super fun to see ur shots get stuck in the ships u shot at. If i dont prey to RNGesus i wont get more then over pens and bounces in the same position.
they are quite different...armor, speed ,gun and concelment.
I know the feeling, my all time damage record in monty was on a defeat. Some teams just wanna lose no matter what you do.
Mine was in a Thunderer but still lost.
Most of record breaking games are close defeats, or more rarely, close wins. Mine (384k Yama) was basically last second RNG pull towards our win with dev strike on a CV. How often have I dev struck a CV afterwards? 0 times.
@@milionST I find bbs usually devstrike cvs when a team gets totally blown out and they just want the match to end.
Helpfull Video sadly i dont feel the iowa at all. I cant seem to hit and if its only 1 shell thats either riccochet or whatever... very rarely cits even on broadside targets rng goes everywere... i fight so hard but i rarely get over 50-70k dmg with it (i think i do in the middle around 51k per btl.)... (at least i know how to stay alive and fight with it now after 66 battles though haha...)
"you dont pay extra" - wrong. "you always pay extra" - right
You pay full repair/service regardless if you survive with 100% or 1% with all heals used.
Nice team you had their.
Here's the thing, Flamu. There are certain ships that are bad on paper, but there are also people can manage to make these ships work. I enjoyed the Izumo (grinded through it 3-4 years ago, way before it got any buff at all), FDG, Colorado etc. while most others despise them.
And while there are certain ships that are good on paper, some people can't make them work either. After regrinding USN BB line for 5 times, fought hundreds of battles, I still found the NC (that you super fond of) the least favourable ship in the entire line. Even though I can manage to play the NC decently (56% WR over 200+ battles), I still hate this ship for the ridiculous shell arc.
So, return to your hatred (or despise?) to the new USN BB line, I found myself neutral with the Kansas. Yes, she is a mediocre ship, but not unplayable. I have 56% WR over 20+ battles with her now, by playing stupid HE spam from 20km+. It's stupid, but it worked. I don't have the Minnesota yet, but I found her armor scheme is pretty decent against AP shells, and with the options in the 6th upgrade slot, I'm sure the long range HE spam strategy will work even better>
My point is, as a CC, you can surely give your opinion on a certain ship, but don't be too fixate on it. I hate to see a serie of videos just to look down on a line of ships. These ships are on the released stage, which means their stats will not be changed anytime soon. So why make a rant about it? Could you please focus more on how to make them work?
Ya it seems the majority think the ships SUCK ASS, they dont but trying telling that to the meta/op ship herd. The only thing i HATE about Kansas the ACCURACY, a shotgun would be more accurate at times, Jingle recently uploaded replay of the Minnesota and she seems to HAVE the accuracy you would expect of a US BB, plus the 38mm plating is nice. still havent seen Vermont a lot but 12 457s and THICC FULL PLATE ARMOR, what can possibly go wrong right?
If you have a problem with NC, the problem is you. If someone has a problem with Kansas, the problem is (at least partly) the ship. That's what you watch Flamu for: he plays well, so when he says there is a problem with the ship, you can be confident that is actually the case, and the problem is not in fact with him. We all have our preferences, and he is no exception, but you even admit that you are able to get decent results out of NC; the only issue with her is that she doesn't match your preferences. Izumo and Colorado would be cases of the average player being the problem, because they have always performed fine. That seems not to be the case with the fat USN BBs, for reasons Flamu explained. Tough luck.
Are you honestly suggesting playing those as 20km HE spammers? Is that the best possible way to wring some kind of performance out of them? Not that it is actually likely, because your "20+ battles" sample is nowhere near statistically significant, but even if it were... In that case why play those rather than, you know, anything else?
If flamu makes a comparison between the two tier X and suggests that Vermont is not quite worth the grinding and suffering, then I have no objection at all. But why bother make all the comparison between the two tier VIII and IX, as if they were the goal of grinding? Like, Kansas and Minnesota both suck, you should not aim to own it?
Obviously Iowa and NC are the better ships. But we still have to grind through Kansas and Minnesota to get to the tier X, and I see no point in comparing the tier VIII and IX ships.