I have news from the land of Warships. Since the CBT testers were not under an NDA, like the Alpha testers, I have no problem telling you that they royally screwed you over.

First off. when the US battleships first came out, the stock Wyoming-class didn't have those stupid lifeboats constricting the arc of fire for your number 4 turret.
The destroyers had 3 smoke charges that lasted 40 seconds and had a 2 minute reload. There was no boost.
The Iowa-class had double the AA that it does now. They turned half of the AA into dual purpose guns that only act as AA for a short amount of time.
The Murmansk-class cruiser is an Omaha-class cruiser with an artificial range and penetration buff, because Russian. (the creators are Russian, in case you didn't know that)
The real Murmansk was the USS Milwaukee that was leased to the Russians. When she was returned to the US Navy, she was barley afloat and infested with rats and cockroaches. She was immediately fumigated. After that was done and the damage was inspected, it was decided that the cost of repairing her was too much and she was sold for scrap.

The reason for the royal screwing over of players is because, instead of doing the logical thing of taking data from all the servers, the creation team only took data from the RUSSIAN servers!
And Russians play like idiots.
What the destroyers would do is clump up. One would pop smoke, and then when it was out, the next one would pop smoke, etc, creating a wall of smoke.
The Battleships would all clump together so that any aircraft coming in would be immediately slaughtered from the combined AA.
So, this being WarGaming, they decided to overreact and over-nerf everything.
Destroyers are practically unplayable, especially the early US DDs because their torpedo range is so short. basically, if you are an early US DD, only play Co-op matches against AI, because at least then you have a small chance of surviving, vs nearly zero chance in a regular game.
The boost is worthless. It increases your engine power by about 6%, IIRC. So you get about 6-7more knots.

Also, don't feel left out when you see an Arkansas Beta in a game. It is only a STOCK Wyoming-class with a fancy paint job. No AA what so ever. Thanks for a useless ship, WG!

4642440

The destroyers had 3 smoke charges that lasted 40 seconds and had a 2 minute reload. There was no boost.

As a DD captain, I will readily admit that these fucked us over, but at the same time I can see at least why they reduced the smoke duration; It was a bit too extreme for cruiser and BB players. That said, I still miss it.

The Murmansk-class cruiser is an Omaha-class cruiser with an artificial range and penetration buff, because Russian. (the creators are Russian, in case you didn't know that)

The buff is miniscule, only a 1 point increase on some stats. Also, the Murmansk doesn't have access to the Omaha (B) hull which gives you six torpedo tubes a side (very much like the Wickes, Clemson, and Nicholas class DDs) and two more guns. At the same time, the AA on the B hull is still appreciable, enough to reliably shoot down aircraft and protect larger ships, when used in concert with your fighter plane. As such I still feel that the Omaha is a better ship.

Destroyers are practically unplayable, especially the early US DDs because their torpedo range is so short. basically, if you are an early US DD, only play Co-op matches against AI, because at least then you have a small chance of surviving, vs nearly zero chance in a regular game. The boost is worthless. It increases your engine power by about 6%, IIRC. So you get about 6-7more knots.

You're wrong here. I regularly pull 3-4 kills (against players) with a Clemson and it's meager 5.5km range. It's all about exploiting cover and using your smoke wisely. That said, this is not the first game I've played US DDs in (BS:P, BS:M, Enigma: Rising Tide, etc...) so I'm kinda used to the American DD's limitations. Also, the boost may not be that useful in combat, but it is valuable in helping you maneuver into, or out of, position, and I will admit those few extra knots of speed have saved my skin before in helping me get to cover or out of detection range.

Not saying that the nerf was needed or wanted, but it's still playable, and honestly makes things more challenging. I like a good challenge, so this is all good for me.

4659518 This is Wargaming we are talking about, too. Their theory goes "If it has to be nerfed, might as well go up to 11!"

BTW, what is your opinion on the Arkansas Beta?

4659975
Utterly shit. If it was an upgraded Wyoming, with AA and gun improvements, then I'd be happy with it.

4662090 Exactly. They said "We are grateful for your help" but gave us a below-stock wyoming with a fany paint job. The Alpha testers got the Iwaki Alpha, which isn't bad (I've even heard it still gets the 40 seconds of smoke!), but the beta testers, who's job is nearly as important as the alpha testers, if not more, get a piece of junk. I bet if they had given us a tier 5, it wouldn't have had AA!

The Arkansas we get is the 1912 Arkansas.
The 1912 Arkansas didn't pass muster for the Great White Fleet, but this did:

(USS Florida BM-9, a MONITOR!)

4642440
4662090

I think you two are being overly harsh on the Arkansas Beta. I personally happen to like the ship. Yes she has no AA, yes she has by default a shorter range. That being said, she is not just a stock Wyoming. If she was she'd have a weaker hull and slower speed. She however has the Wyoming (B) hull health and the upgraded engine. She also has more secondary armament than either of the tech tree Wyoming hulls.

Another important aspect you are both overlooking is the fact that she has SIX full upgrade slots over the Wyoming's two. This lets you tweak quite a bit about her to fit your playstyle.

And of course she also has all the benefits of being a premium ship. More credits per game, more XP per game.

So yeah I like her and I still sail both the Arkansas Beta and my Wyoming despite having moved up the tech tree.

4753744 dude, all that doesn't change the fact that the A-B doesn't have any AA. Even ALPHA TESTERS think that ship is crap
I know, because I have several of them in my clan. they sail their Iwaki Alphas more than their Arkansas Betas.

4753752

..... so? IS AA is the be-all, end-all of ship performance then? We should just forego main guns altogether for more AA? The Wyoming's AA isn't impressive in the first place, on either hull.

Sorry but I don't consider the amount of AA on a ship a deciding factor on whether a ship is worth sailing or not.

4753771 Sure, Wyoming's AA isn't that good on either hull, but really, no Tier 4 has good AA. The fact is, with no AA, the Arkansas Beta is a magnet for torpedo bombers. If I were in a carrier and I saw an Arkansas Beta on the enemy team, that is the first ship I would go for. I can count on one hand the times I have been sunk by gunfire. ONE HAND. The rest were torpedo planes. The fact of the matter is, no matter how bad the Wyoming's AA is, it still has a way of defending itself against planes, which the AB doesn't.