Loading...WORK IN PROGRESS
Impression on the new Heavy Cruiser for the British fleet, Exeter with her 203s deliver a punch that British Light Cruisers just can’t match. Hope you have a wonderful day and I’ll catch you next time!
Tier V British Cruiser Exeter Replay
https://playtogether.worldofwarships.com/invite/OwzqAkj – Warships Friend Invite
https://discord.gg/33xzEjR – Discord Server
Quality really bad?
potato quality….light cruiser with 8in guns..sure noster….sure….
LEX Maximaguy87 away to say I thought the RN said it was a heavy.
+Steve Pirie it is a heavy cruiser……cruisers with 6in guns are light and cruisers w 8 in are heavy..
The official classification of light or heavy cruiser is purely by gun caliber and not armor. For example the Cleveland is a light cruiser but has better armor than most heavy cruisers including Graf Spee.
So to be correct Notser should say it’s a lightly armored heavy cruiser. But that would probably confuse even more people…
Until London Treaty of 1930. Which meant the USN was forced to reclassify Pensacola as a Heavy Cruiser, when before it was a light cruiser (for how lightly protected it was! and that it was intended as a heavy scout which is one of the roles of Light Cruiser).
Yay finally Brit heavy cruiser, hopefully there’ll be a full line
+Apothecary Terry oh for sure. I don’t know why British battlecruisers and aircraft carriers for that matter haven’t been added since there’s so much to choose from
T5 could be Hawkins, with York in T6 as a beefy buffed Exeter, T7 could be a County class like Suffolk, T8 possibly the Admiral class cruisers with 9x 203mm guns, 9 is kinda a grey area unless you bump Admiral into T9, Suffolk into T8 and that leaves T7 open to some extremely random British CA like one of the County subclasses that lacked the belt armour of the Kents, with the Churchill super cruiser as an obvious choice for T10. It’s finding a good combination of T7-8 ships to fit in the line that stumps me a bit.
+Bobert Baratheon British carriers are on their way! Not that I’m a fan of the new carriers personally so probably won’t play them much. Battlecruisers are a bit less likely as WG keep saying they won’t introduce a separate line for that class and there are RN cruisers and battleships already.
+Apothecary Terry I meant at launch. And as for the battlecruisers, I mean things like Renown and the like. WWI era British and German
Will be a bit…possible..i mean..its possible but will be not really full
Let say they have hawkins,york,county and its sub classes..and the plan Z aka Churchill class Large Cruiser (i dunno this one is real or not,got info from Tzoli)
I am not gonna pay a penny for that…not in this current situation at least..sorry??
The Exeter is a Furutaka with better reload plus smoke plus heal….. totally balanced
+SwedishFox Those numbers are wrong, Furu is 13.9km. Some people seem intent on lying to try and make the Exeter look better than it is.
+WhiteWhale Exeter has still better range.
+SwedishFox Yes, but by only 0.3km not the 1.3km the previous poster was trying to mislead people with.
+WhiteWhale Well, ‘ecktually’, Flamu takes a much more pragmatistic look at a lot of ships when reviewing them. He is quite opinionated, and this sometimes leaks into his videos. However almost all his opinions are based upon a pretty sound analysis. Being a highly ‘competitive’ player, (min-maxing, competitive gameplay is his favourite etc) he can seem a bit ‘elitist’, however he always states that he does value those trying to learn- and has produced many videos analysing people’s replays. Commenting on how they can improve, and ignoring his more ‘elitist’ parts of his fanbase which jump whenever he makes an accusation.
The same argument goes for when you remove all consumables from all ships. Many of them are simply ‘meh’, while others are broken. Consumables are a balancing factor, and to disregard them is foolish. The ship is a bit sketchy without the consumables, however the point he raises is *valid.* What you forget to realise is that Exeter gets the same consumables as Emerald, but gets a lot more than what Emerald has. 203mm guns are “very spicy” for T5. A much faster reload than Furutaka, as well as considerably more range and frankly ‘god-tier’ concealment means that even without consumables she is still very strong off the starting blocks.
Factor in the consumables and the likes of Omaha, Emerald, Krasny Krym and other cruisers melt before her.
+noobtotale A 3s faster reload, which is offset by lower HE and AP damage and pen, also worse dispersion so you will be getting fewer hits per salvo. 300m is hardly ‘considerably’ more range. That ‘god-tier’ concealment is also 1km worse than that of the Emerald, a ship it shares the same armour as.
Take a shot every time this 203mm gun cruiser gets called a light cruiser
Exactly. The Washington naval treaty classifies 203mm armed ships as heavy cruisers
+Bobert Baratheon Wasn’t it London Naval Treaty that actually set the definition on paper? I thought Washington Naval Treaty only set the tonnage limit.
Typical notser really.
And in our latest installment in our video series Fiddle While Rome Burns, we review yet another premium ship while ignoring the dumpster fire WG set in update 8.0. There is no point in discussing new content at this time, nor is there any reason why any sane person should invest any more money in this game as it currently stands, WG promises to fix what they broke (eventually) notwithstanding.
+stflaw Nope, I got my eyes checked and everything. Are you pretending that people wouldn’t intentionally play more potato before complaining to WG, as if it was all WGs fault?? XD
+jamespfp 1. You don’t understand what deranged means. 2. Yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying. I play maybe 20 games per day, max. Even if I threw all my games, my results would be statistically insignificant. Plus, to suggest I would spend hours of my time just to intentionally lose and stick it to WG is beyond absurd. Sadly, your connection with reality is tenuous at best. There’s another word you can look up.
+stflaw *LULZ*
(A) Who died and made you king of all word meanings? I do know what it means, “deranged” including its Latin roots and the rest.
(B) Why don’t you tell the truth about the number of matches you’ve thrown rather than play with the proverbial cards you’ve been dealt?
(C) So Yeah — you’ll criticize Notser in the same way you probably play Cruisers. Passive-Aggressively, in such a manner that you’ll die more than exploit your way to victory.
*LULZ*
+stflaw *AND ALL BECUZ* at the end of the day, the only people who can’t roll with the WG punches are the idiots who behave in a UNILATERAL fashion, like yourself. 😀
I just bought premium time after 0.8.0 went live. Are you mad?
4:54 FUBUKI?!
I think the Jingles virus is spreading… Or it’s a trademark swap. Jingles hass been pulling a Notser, so Notser now can pull a Jingles.
Notser, can you tell WG that the camo scheme for Exeter is wrong? HMS Exeter only ever had one colour paint scheme throughout her wartime career. This paint scheme is taken from her sister, York. Many pictures of York sport this camo, but Exeter never had it. I know it is nit picking, but I know WG will take flak from the history buffs in the game.
Maybe this is because they are also building British CA split line with York and they have York’s camo scheme already developed
This is nothing new. The Arizona is incorrect as well. The radar shown on the forward tripod mast was installed on the Pennsylvania, not the Arizona.
+Eric Paslick same thing with Gajah Mada, it’s the wrong year as in the game it is represented before it was given to Indonesia. So the mast, all of it is wrong.
+Billy Lauwda I wonder if they go by what the best quality pictures is so while the exact details are off, the model still looks nice? Or more likely to got too far with the model and didn’t want to pay to redo 🙂
Imagine getting blow up by Graff Spree
IT’S NOT A LIGHT CRUISER IT HAS 203MM GUNS WITH 10 SEC RELOAD
The brits themselves Called it a heavy cruiser
In all but the guns, I think was how he put it.
12s reload.
+MidnightPhoenix07 except the heavy cruiser Gun size is set as minimum 200mm and maximum 280 something (graf spee size)
The Russian light cruiser had 4 180mm Guns and another one had 3×3 180 mm Guns both light cruisers
The difference is set at 200mm
Sounds like a Kirov: weak hull of a CL, plus CA guns.
But with smoke.
And heal.
And twice the torp range.
And single torp launcher.
And built-in acceleration module.
Oh, the British bias in this game…
+Sir Raint, Knight of Silverwing You “Sir” feel provoked by my 1st statement i guess. With all respect, but is there one weak british ship in wows? There are absolute crap Soviet ships (Krasny Whatever) while the worst Brit in my opinion is the DoY. Which is not really bad.
The British CLs were my easiest and fastest grind of all lines. Stupidly overpowered i would say. Having a cloaking device on top of all other toys is pretty handy. And now the CA gets it too.
+Mr. Meerkat they pen, but only if they hit. Which is offset with bad dispersion.
+Caeric The benefit of more barrels is “balanced away” with bad dispersion and the Brit still gets a ton of toys on top. Also, hitting with Kirov at 15km… Honestly, would you even take the Molotov over Exeter?
+Glupi Medo You do realize both ships use cruiser dispersion and standard 2.05 cruiser sigma I hope?
+Glupi Medo British CLs are weak until you reach Leander (Emerald is ok in my opinion though). British DDs are weak until you reach Icarus (some say it’s utter crap but good in my opinion). British BB line has 1 weak ship, Monarch. Many players find it to be the weakest T8 BB, especially when being uptiered. Some also consider QE to be shitty, but probably because the twin guns have inconsistent accuracy & have fewer than its rivals except Warspite, Bayern, and P.E. Friedrich.
However Russian lines have fewer weak ships. Podvoisky is literally the worst T5 DD & the only underwhelming ship in its line. Not to mention the 2 premium DDs at the same tier (Gremy & Okhotnik) are borderline strong. Russian cruiser line is perfect with no weak ships at all. The only Russian BB that exists now is also on par with Giulio Cesare.
I believe the Exeter and her sister ship York, were ‘Treaty’ Cruisers much like Pensacola and her sister ship, Salt Lake City. ‘Treaty’ Cruisers were a result of the Washington Naval Treaty, however there isn’t really a definite mention of ‘Light’ or ‘Heavy’ cruisers.
They would amend this in the London Naval Teaty of 1930. It instead went along the lines of (and I’m paraphrasing from both treaties here)”Any ship with guns of 155 mm’s or larger must be deemed a Heavy Cruiser, where as any ship with guns of 155 mm’s or smaller are to be deemed as a Light Cruiser.” So what we ended up with are ships like Pensacola and Exeter, built before the two Naval treaties and before their respective remodels to fix any issues with their design.
If you want more information about these things, go to Military History Explains’ channel. There are two videos that he has that will better explain it. Along with other individuals who he has links to. The two videos are “Ship Classes WW2 – 101,” and “WW2 Ship Guide – Deep Version.”
+sccrdude22 I know that. However, if you had looked up the two videos in my earlier comment; you would see that they were classified as heavy cruisers after both the Washington Naval Treaty and the London Naval Treaty. The second of the two videos goes into greater detail of those treaties, while the first is more of an introduction of sorts.
Actually, 170mm was the thing for CA. You could still be a CL with 160mm guns.
+HunterSteel29 Not under the London Naval Treaty. 155mm (6.1″) was the hard cut-off.
So the county class
+Justin Pyke yeah, but that treaty didn’t last long. Although that means that ships like Kirov have an identity crisis as to weather or not they’re CA or CL.
Have you got any info about the russian bbs ,when are they going to add it for testing and actual gameplay?
They have HE spam gameplay like the Brits.
They were just announced. So, about a month till CC port looks and another few weeks till they can play them. Likely, about 4 to 6 months till we can play them.
On a normal time schedule. Who knows, maybe WG will love them and work harder to push them out sooner. Or perhaps CV tweaks will delay them
Maybe this shd be at tier 6…maybe a hawkins at tier 5 and the county class at tier 7
Someone strap Notser to a torpedo for calling Exeter a light cruiser!
No matter how good the ship is it’s not worth buying until they sort out the CV situation
It is if it irritates people like you.
HMS Exeter is a heavy cruiser of the York class, which was supposed to be a cheaper version of the County class heavy cruiser. What makes this confusing is the only real technical difference between a light and heavy cruiser were the ships guns(as per the Washington Treaty of 1922). Which means that a cruiser with more armor but with 6 inch (152mm) guns than one with 8 inch (203mm) guns is still a light cruiser while the 8 inch one is a heavy cruiser.
Which is why RN light cruisers were just as well protected as their heavy counterparts.
+Farmer Balmer They predate the WNT.
If nothing else, Wikipedia lists Exeter as a heavy cruiser.
+WhiteWhale was proving him wrong on the fact he said any thing with 203s and higher was a heavy cruiser. I now for a fact the Exeter was a heavy cruiser….
+Farmer Balmer That was a political cheat to get the battlecruiser (HMS Courageous, I think it was) funded at a time when only light cruisers would get approved… Was never seriously thought of as any type of light cruiser by any Navy… Merely on paper.
Graf Spee is one thing. Scharnhorst is what you should be worrying about.
+Chris Gaming I am not calling the Exeter a light cruiser it is a heavy, But saying all ships that have 203s or higher is faculty wrong at no point did he say that he only meant after the Washington NT. so I could say the HMS General Wolfe Was heavy cruiser because it had a 18 inch gun…