Jump to content
Yakumo_san

Colorado - Inferior, but not necessarily bad?

Recommended Posts

So i've tried comparing the fully upgraded Colorado vs the fully upgraded Nagato (which I own), and I'd like to say that the decision between which of them is the better isn't actually as clear cut as people think - Colorado actually has good AA compared to Nagato's lackluster AA which has gotten me killed countless times, since both are so slow you generally get left behind by cruiser pubbies and have to fend against CV Torp attacks by yourself. Colorado's citadels are also much harder to hit if you compare them to Nagato's... in fact; Nagato seems to take a lot more citadel damage (they're bigger? that could be said for most IJN ships in comparison to their USN counterparts in fact). This leaves the guns; where Nagato arguably comes out on top, alongside having a much better quality of life grind because you begin with 19.5km range and the stock shells aren't that bad.

If you list it down to small points...

 

Nagato has arguably better guns, better secondaries, and more health and a slight edge on maneuverability.

Colorado has better AA, better defenses, and citadel protection. I've gone in a training room and tested their protection from my Amagi's 410cm, and the Colorado received way less citadel hits on the 20+ salvoes I fired at them compared to Nagato ships that just bit the dust quickly.

 

Am I missing something? Because both seem to be pretty good. The lower Health is a problem potentially, but the Colorado's citadels being much harder to hit appear to indicate that it doesn't need that HP as much as Nagato does. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nagato actually has some of the smallest citadels in game, though they are hit by angled fire that comes in through the belt at medium range more easily.  Colorado just has really hard to hit citadels.  if it had good guns, it would probably be OP with its combination of survivability and firepower.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nagato actually has some of the smallest citadels in game, though they are hit by angled fire that comes in through the belt at medium range more easily.  Colorado just has really hard to hit citadels.  if it had good guns, it would probably be OP with its combination of survivability and firepower.

Why is everyone complaining about it being a massive pile of turd post-New Mexico? Is it people being spoilt? The stock grind? Baddies? A combination of all three?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Slow in a big map meta and has really bad dispersion. Nothing insurmountable but it makes it very hot and cold. I only pulled 60k average in it, compared to 75k plus in my other BBs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is everyone complaining about it being a massive pile of turd post-New Mexico? Is it people being spoilt? The stock grind? Baddies? A combination of all three?

 

Slow in a big map meta and has really bad dispersion. Nothing insurmountable but it makes it very hot and cold. I only pulled 60k average in it, compared to 75k plus in my other BBs.

I did OK in the Colorado and in my opinion it's not as bad as people say it is, but it's not terrific either. I didn't do as good in the ship as the New Mexico in terms of damage per game (averaged 49k), but my win rate was 57% so not terrible. I never played this ship stock as I free XP'd both hulls and ground out the other modules. This ship would be really painful as a stock ship so I can see where some of the complaining would come from.

Getting used to the dispersion on the guns was a bit of a learning curve for me, but they can release a world of hurt when things come together. The lack of speed was a real downer in high tier matches since almost every other ship is faster. Looking forward to the North Carolina!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm finding it intolerable, personally.  In beta, I thought it was not bad, simply a downgrade from New Mexico.  In live (well, OBT...) I can't seem to make it work at all.  Yes, the AA is great.  Yes, the citadels are easy to protect.  But the guns can't hit anything.  You have ~2000 higher potential damage per shot, but New Mex had 4 more guns.  You have greatly improved range, but the dispersion is so bad that you can rarely hit more than one shot in a long range salvo.  Furthermore, I'm finding it very inaccurate at close ranges.  I've had multiple cases where I'd miss half or more of my shots at a range of ~7km.  Hell, I LOST a co-op battle because I couldn't reliably hit a beached cruiser at 7km.  

The protected citadels don't mean much when you have less HP than the previous tier BB, and lower health than the tier -2 IJN BB.  It's extremely vulnerable to HE spam.  In fact, I tend to ignore BBs in favor of cruisers when protecting myself or choosing targets.  It starts to see bigger maps than the NM, so the speed (or lack thereof) hurts a lot more.  

I can't claim to be on the same level as others here.  In fact, I suspect I'm bad.  Still, I do ~20k less damage per game than I did in the previous two BBs.  If I'm aggressive, I get melted by HE or invisitorped out of existance (thing is so slow that you have to react to torps long before you can see them.)  If I play soft, I spend the whole game doing 1240 damage per salvo.  Is it me?  Partially.  But I place a lot of blame on the ship.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the guns could probably use a slight buff, but if they were too good we'd probably have a tier 7 Warspite (which I'm fairly certain got pulled because it was OP (personal speclulation, not actual info))

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just thinking about the weight of fire on target is interesting; While the total is greater for the Colorado compared to the New Mexico (17920 lb vs 16824 lb broadside weight), the salvo has 2/3rds the number of rounds means that every miss counts more for the Colorado than the New Mexico without accounting for dispersion. Seems it should have the dispersion buffed somewhat IMHO taking account the rest of the specs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just thinking about the weight of fire on target is interesting; While the total is greater for the Colorado compared to the New Mexico (17920 lb vs 16824 lb broadside weight), the salvo has 2/3rds the number of rounds means that every miss counts more for the Colorado than the New Mexico without accounting for dispersion. Seems it should have the dispersion buffed somewhat IMHO taking account the rest of the specs.

The same problem happesn when you go from Fuso to Nagato actually. You lose a lot of your guns, and thus, RNG counter to get bigger damage, higher alpha weapons. I'd like to think that while New Mexico and Fuso are better at killing cruisers and less armored targets, Nagato and Colorado are better at BB vs BB engagements, thanks to their high pen being able to deal more consistant penetrating shell damage against other BBs.

I guess that in concern to the accuracy though, I should probably play the Colorado myself. Like, the Fuso and the Nagato feel to be the same roughly in accuracy, maybe the Nagato even a tad bit more accurate... just that the shotgun pattern seems to override the better accuracy naturally. I guess you could call this, if any of you are familiar to dice rolls, a 12d6 vs 8d8.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just thinking about the weight of fire on target is interesting; While the total is greater for the Colorado compared to the New Mexico (17920 lb vs 16824 lb broadside weight), the salvo has 2/3rds the number of rounds means that every miss counts more for the Colorado than the New Mexico without accounting for dispersion. Seems it should have the dispersion buffed somewhat IMHO taking account the rest of the specs.

Another thought on that:  Colorado might have a higher weight of broadside, but NM has higher damage potential.  Colorado's max possible is 97600, vs NM's 126000.  Yeah.  You go up a tier, and lose a quarter of your outgoing firepower...  I could accept that if it came with an accuracy bonus, but it does not.  

The same problem happesn when you go from Fuso to Nagato actually. You lose a lot of your guns, and thus, RNG counter to get bigger damage, higher alpha weapons. I'd like to think that while New Mexico and Fuso are better at killing cruisers and less armored targets, Nagato and Colorado are better at BB vs BB engagements, thanks to their high pen being able to deal more consistant penetrating shell damage against other BBs.

I guess that in concern to the accuracy though, I should probably play the Colorado myself. Like, the Fuso and the Nagato feel to be the same roughly in accuracy, maybe the Nagato even a tad bit more accurate... just that the shotgun pattern seems to override the better accuracy naturally. I guess you could call this, if any of you are familiar to dice rolls, a 12d6 vs 8d8.

Minimum damage of 12 vs 8.  Average of 42 vs 36.  Max of 72 vs 64.    The 8 siders are a poor choice.  Just like Colorado.  

I could understand if it were more of a 5d4 vs 1d20 situation.  The 4s give a higher minimum and equal max, but they trend hard toward the average.  The 20 gives a much higher chance of extreme results.  If you're dependent on luck, the 20 can be a better choice.  But I simply do not see any way the Colorado is not inferior to the New Mexico, in any measure other than AA.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Colorado coulda/shoulda been what the Warspite is.  Slow is ok if you're well armored and a good gun platform.  Unfortunately, the Colorado's guns can be very frustrating, and the armor isn't enough of a trade-off for the massive lack of hitpoints.  In a game where HE and fires can do a lot of damage (especially from common cruiser opponents in tiers 6-8), 15,000 hit points is just too much to miss.  Couple all of that with the lack of speed for the bigger maps that it sees, and it's just a bad deal all around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the guns could probably use a slight buff, but if they were too good we'd probably have a tier 7 Warspite (which I'm fairly certain got pulled because it was OP (personal speclulation, not actual info))

Warspite is the Type 59 of ships :p. Really I don't think buffing the guns to Warspite standard would make it OP. The Warspite is OP because it has nothing that's poor about it. The Colorado would still be slow and have bad HP. At least it would have some teeth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What irks me the most is the blatant money grab that WG did with the Colorado (and to a lesser extend the Pesicola). You go up a tier, retain the same armor, have less guns, have less HP, but you only get better AA. But now, at tier 7, you can see tier X's. Yeah have fun get shot at by Yamato's

Is there any tank in WoT that has less HP the the tier before it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did OK in the Colorado and in my opinion it's not as bad as people say it is, but it's not terrific either. I didn't do as good in the ship as the New Mexico in terms of damage per game (averaged 49k), but my win rate was 57% so not terrible.

Bear in mind that because battle counts are lower than in WoT, per-ship winrates are even more useless than per-tank winrates. It's not unusual to get 57% winrate in a grind ship purely by luck.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What irks me the most is the blatant money grab that WG did with the Colorado (and to a lesser extend the Pesicola). You go up a tier, retain the same armor, have less guns, have less HP, but you only get better AA. But now, at tier 7, you can see tier X's. Yeah have fun get shot at by Yamato's

Is there any tank in WoT that has less HP the the tier before it...

Tortoise. :3c

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh. I've got a mate who is loving the 'Cola. In his words: "these guns actually do something."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bear in mind that because battle counts are lower than in WoT, per-ship winrates are even more useless than per-tank winrates. It's not unusual to get 57% winrate in a grind ship purely by luck.

 

is this your way of telling me I'm bad? :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh. I've got a mate who is loving the 'Cola. In his words: "these guns actually do something."

Did you mean "Colo" or are you just mentioning the other unloved USN Tier VII CA? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh. I've got a mate who is loving the 'Cola. In his words: "these guns actually do something."

I can actually see that.  P-coli is much different than its predecessor, but it at least gains some usefulness.  The Cleveland is very noob friendly.  It is, perhaps, the epitome of HE spam goodness.  I'll admit, it's one of my highest average damage ships, simply because of how easy it is to use.  The P-coli, however, likely has a higher skill ceiling.  It can blast HE effectively (though not so well as Cleveland), but it also has a far superior AP round.  Of course, ~15 second reload vs ~6 second reload means there is a much greater opportunity cost in switching ammo...  but if you get it right, you can smack the hell out of cruisers (and some BBs) with AP while still being effective against other targets with HE.

 

Sadly, Colorado does not feature such a dynamic.  The only active advantage it has over New Mexico (considering AA passive, as you really can't chase down planes in a 21kt BB) is range.  This can lead you into being one of those max range BB shitters who land a dozen hits (each probably for minimum damage) while hugging the back line, watching helplessly as the cap timer counts down.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, Colorado does not feature such a dynamic.  The only active advantage it has over New Mexico (considering AA passive, as you really can't chase down planes in a 21kt BB) is range.  This can lead you into being one of those max range BB shitters who land a dozen hits (each probably for minimum damage) while hugging the back line, watching helplessly as the cap timer counts down.  

Doesn't the Colorado have better armor too? New Mexicos seem to be easy picking for my Nagato, while Colorados while not particularly a notch up from their "lower tier" friend seems a bit more prone to induce shots bouncing. Might be just me though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think so.  Its citadels are well protected, at least.  Problem is, it's hard to leverage that advantage since Colorado is more vulnerable to HE spam, and it seems half of teams right now are cruisers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think so.  Its citadels are well protected, at least.  Problem is, it's hard to leverage that advantage since Colorado is more vulnerable to HE spam, and it seems half of teams right now are cruisers.

That and its slow speed means it's harder for it to extricate itself out of a bad situation or chase down a fleeing target like most IJN BBs can. I think this, coupled with its shorter main gun range, are ultimately the main weakness of the Colorado, and pre Nor-Cal USN BB. All the guns and armor doesn't mean jack if you aren't in a position to leverage them.  I mean by Mid tiers you're talking about roughly ~10 kts difference in speed between USN BB and IJN BBs which is huge strategically speaking. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, they're a bit like driving a Maus or T95.  You have to take a long view.  You have to decide minutes in advance if it's better to push your flank or return to cap.  And sometimes, you simply don't have enough information to make that decision.  It doesn't hurt as much in the lower tiers, but Colorado sees some of the bigger maps.  I've had cases where the flow of battle changes quickly, due to a good/lucky volley or torpedo spread, and I'm either screwed because I'm in a losing battle that I cannot escape, or screwed because the battle is moving away faster than I can follow.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a really unpleasant ship to drive.  Nobody likes going slow, and sometimes RNG just decides to guide your shells around whatever ship your shooting at.  Sometimes you just spawn in a place that takes you forever to get anywhere meaningful.  It's also just a slight downgrade to the NM.  I don't feel like I see better performances against BBs, but maybe I'm just bad.  It's certainly worse against cruisers, where I actually find it harder to cit.  I'm not sure if it's the fact that you lost 4 guns or 16" overpen more (I have no clue where some of my shells land sometimes).   If you manage your HP well, you can take a beating and not die.  Most t7 and below CVs won't even bother bombing you.  

That being said I think it's bad, but it's definitely not the worst. Hatsuharu is a lot more painful to play, for example.  I don't mind playing the Colorado once a day, but now that I want to finish out the grind it's kind of painful.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just played my first game in it stock (I need 3k exp for second hull ) And I actually liked it. The accuracy is much better then the NM and it hurt more when you get citadels. Ill see how it will be once I get the better hull and engine but I don't think ill mind this ship. After all I did enjoy the furutaka.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...