World of Warships – First Look: Tier VIII Premium American Cruiser USS Congress

1,936 views
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (121 votes, average: 4.92 out of 5)
Loading...

Here’s our First Look at Tier VIII Premium American (super)cruiser USS Congress. Like De Zeven Provinciën a few days ago, she enters a very crowded field of cruisers at Tier VIII; unlike De Zeven Provinciën, she offers something quite unique at Tier VIII. She is clearly based on Tier IX’s USS Alaska, but how similar is she really? Join me as we peel away the layers and find out.

FROM WARGAMING:
Hit points – 51150. Plating – 27 mm.
Main battery – 1×3, 2×2 305 mm. Firing range – 19.0 km.
Maximum HE shell damage – 4300. Chance to cause fire – 27%. HE initial velocity – 808 m/s.
Maximum AP shell damage – 8900. AP initial velocity – 762 m/s.
Reload time – 20.0 s. 180 degree turn time – 30.0 s. Maximum dispersion – 207 м. Sigma – 2.05.

AA defense: 14×2 40.0 mm. 20×1 20.0 mm. 6×2 127.0 mm.
AA defense short-range: continuous damage per second – 151, hit probability – 85 %, action zone 2.0 km;
AA defense mid-range: continuous damage per second – 273, hit probability – 90 %, action zone 3.5 km;
AA defense long-range: continuous damage per second – 109, hit probability – 90 %, action zone 5.8 km;
Number of explosions in a salvo – 5, damage within an explosion – 1540, action zone 3.5 – 5.8 km;

Maximum speed – 33.0 kt. Fire duration – 60 s. Turning circle radius – 850 m. Rudder shift time – 13.0 s. Surface detectability – 15.5 km. Air detectability – 9.7 km. Detectability after firing main in smoke – 12.1 km.

Available consumables:
1 slot – Damage Control Party
2 slot – Hydroacoustic Search / Defensive AA fire II
3 slot – Fighter / Spotting Aircraft / Surveillance Radar
4 slot – Repair Party

All stats are listed without crew and upgrade modifiers but with best available modules. The stats are subject to change during the testing.

– http://warships.us/searaptor

#WorldOfWarships

44 Comments:

  1. congress so its slow and takes ages to get in to action and fire is inffective 😉

  2. @SeaRaptor, not really based on Alaska. More like.. the Alaska is based on the preliminary study of the CA2F project (which is in-game Congress). Here’s the study (eh, more like a semi-detailed sketch) –> [I hope I can link it and YT won’t delete it]

    https://www.history.navy.mil/our-collections/photography/numerical-list-of-images/nhhc-series/s-file/S-511-17.html

    • I understand, but in terms of in-game releases, this ship is coming after Alaska. Alaska – and Guam – are much more real in people’s minds, because they were (a) actually built and (b) exist in World of Warships. Congress is (to most players) fantasy-land, because it was never built and exists as just a paper study design. So for the purposes of helping players understand what Congress is, Alaska is the best point of reference to use.

    • @SeaRaptor then again, we’re getting way more fantasy-land ships each year, while there are some pretty unique ships that did actually exist. So in my opinion, Congress should never be added into the game

  3. They burn for 60 sec like BBs. In the past they were having the 45 sec fire duration as you said but they nerfed it . Only the Graf Spee has remained with 45 second fire duration. Imho with no more possibility to mount the skill for shorter fire duration and no fire proof – supercruisers really get melted .

  4. The camo is nice.

    Why would i want this. I have AK and like it, this seems to be a bad AK.
    60$ for a T8 AK that will be in T10 fights.
    I think that is a hard sell.

  5. Makes the Odin’s 53k hp even sillier…..

    • You simply have to treat Odin like you treat Scharnhorst: she’s really a cruiser, she just happens to be a battleship.

  6. I’m still not a fan of naming fictitious ships with a historical name it should not have.

    • Why should it not have this name? Many ships before this period were named after Congress. At least one is planned to be named such in the future.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Congress

    • @SeaRaptor Every Congress has been a frigate or smaller. US “large cruisers” have been named after territories. I would prefer that WG use a territory name for these ships and not the names from the original six frigates from the Naval Act of 1794. You might not think it is a big deal, but I do. Apparently, I am the only one, though.

    • I get what you’re saying, but also consider that the definition of “frigate” has changed quite a bit over the years. Today, we think of a “frigate” as a small-ish ship. In the age of sail, frigates were typically large, well-armed vessels.

  7. Still trying to figure out why they made ‘B’ turret the triple as opposed to ‘X’. If I’m not mistaken the plans they referenced had A/B as the twins with X being a triple, and that layout would help balance the firepower fore and aft. Silly Weegee. Still, for anyone who missed out on Alaska now you can get Alaska Lite ™.

    • Pensacola has superfiring triples over double turrets, because the triple turret barbette would be too wide to fit in the bow and stern of the ship. Not sure that applied here, though

    • @Oleg Jakovljev It’s an Alaska hull, and Alaska had 3×3 so I can’t imagine the barbettes being too small. Moreover I am fairly certain that the plans WG used to create Congress showed the triple turret being in the ‘X’ position, with A/B being superfiring twins. But WG will WG.

  8. I can’t imagine any Tier VI boats having fun trying to kill one of these.

  9. Yay! ANOTHER tier 8 premium!

  10. The Matrix red pill

    T8 overpowered, not really. T8 gets arounnd 75% games with T10 with the criminal match making.

  11. I dont know, I am a bit conflicted about this ship – for T6-7 it will be a monster … for T8 and up an HE-magnet …

    • When she’s top tier, she’ll be a bully. When she’s bottom tier, she’s going to struggle bus a bit, I think.

  12. well folks heres your chance to destroy congress 😉 sorry had to make the joke it was low hanging fruit

  13. Cylon - The Originator

    Played against a few Congress’s. Nothing to write home about.

  14. wow, if this thing gets top tiered it’s going to wreck a lot of cruisers and BBs

  15. The triple turret super firing over a double is just dumb

  16. When will this ship come into the game? Thanks for the review btw 😀

  17. Grandma in Mars Attacks: They blew up Congress, hahahaha!

  18. Charles Larrivee

    Thankfully she’s been reined in a bit since she was first announced, but she’s still stupid and probably shouldn’t have been announced. WG if you want to sell Alaska clones, just bring the OG back 🤣

    • I honestly agree with this sentiment. I don’t know why Alaska was removed in the first place. She’s popular, sure, but that’s because she’s (a) good and (b) fun. That combo makes for ships that sell well and are popular with players. Who knew?

    • Charles Larrivee

      @SeaRaptor she was OP? I have seen people like Flamu make that argument. Personally I don’t agree with it, she has some weaknesses that keep her in check. But somebody at WG clearly agreed with Flamu.

    • @Charles Larrivee You and I are on the same page here. I don’t feel like Alaska was OP at all, especially with the global commander skill changes that make her more vulnerable to fire than ever before.

  19. That’s one of my biggest beefs with WG; same model of gun on two different ships. However, somehow the reload, rate of fire or range is different. Most annoying are the Mk 32 127mm 38cal. secondary US BB mounts. Massachusetts’ secondaries shouldn’t be any different than the other US BBs.

  20. Remove one gun from Alaska and make it a tier 8. WG got lazy . I’ll pass on this one , I already have an Alaska .
    Might be worthwhile to players that missed out on Alaska or just simply because you want one.
    Would like to see more warships that really existed as opposed to this ever growing crop of existed only on paper and fantasy ships , but that’s just me.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *