Novorossiysk

[HuskerBill]

Completed both weekly Novorossiysk combat missions and have come up 350 battle tokens short.  In order to obtain  the required tokens, I must spend 750 doubloons each from a minimum of 3 out of 60 potential bundles.  Just wondering if I missed something task wise to acquire more tokens!

[Efros]

She aint worth dubs.

[Wolfswetpaws]

1 hour ago, HuskerBill said:

Completed both weekly Novorossiysk combat missions and have come up 350 battle tokens short.  In order to obtain  the required tokens, I must spend 750 doubloons each from a minimum of 3 out of 60 potential bundles.  Just wondering if I missed something task wise to acquire more tokens!

If you want the ship that badly, she is available in the Premium Shop for less than $28 dollars (US).
Personally, I would not spend doubloons on random bundles.

https://na.wargaming.net/shop/wows/vehicles/sh_188  
 

[MidnightPhoenix07]

3 hours ago, HuskerBill said:

Just wondering if I missed something task wise to acquire more tokens!

Nope. You're in WeeGeeLand, that's just how things are done here. You either have a really long grind (like for Pozharsky a year ago) for a ship that may not be super great, or you'll have to pay at least some doubloons to get the final reward (most early access events, some of the web campaign events, dockyards, etc.).

It was free at one point when it first came out, as the final reward for a multi-part mission chain. And it's a lot cheaper in this event than any other t6 battleship would be in the armory, but I agree with Efros that it's not really worth the doubloons. There are other t6 battleships I'd buy first -- Repulse, Warspite, WV41, probably even Dunkerque.

If you have lots of doubloons sitting around, it could be worthwhile just to get the ship out of future crate drops. But 

[HuskerBill]

Nope.  Not gonna spend a penny on it.  Thanks for replies all.

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

Seems to be a relatively easy grind for...

...oh...wait, you won't make it the full way.

Eh. Hard pass it is then.

Sometimes I wonder about WG's mentality...and then I look at my company's business decisions and I think...rich people making rich people choices...

[MashedPotatoSalad]

Yep it's not worth it. Novo used to be a free mission ship from a few years ago and it was nerfed a few days before release.

She's a worse off uptiered Cesare with an anemic health pool and doesn't bring much to the table.

This was the type of ship one would expect to eventually end up in the coal section and not a quick cashgrab lol.

Edited January 13 by MashedPotatoSalad

[qkarl]

I have Giulio Cesare and Novorossiysk and my advice is not to fall into the trap of buying doubloons to have a useless ship. I am always surprised by Wows' voracity. These missions that do not reward beginner players who could, with a Premium Tier VI Battleship, learn to play with Battleships earning credits to continue the game.

Novorossiysk's assignment to Tier VI is highly questionable!

 

Giulio Cesare (Tier V) is another story: it was removed from sales because it is an infallible sniper.

 

 

Edited January 13 by qkarl

[Project45_Opytny]

11 minutes ago, qkarl said:

Novorossiysk's assignment to Tier VI is highly questionable!

 

Julius Caesar is another story: it was removed from sales because it is an infallible sniper.

Doesn't you answer your own argument by yourself?

Giulio Cesare in her 1930s refitted form has been overperforming for a Tier V battleship, and a comparable ship (as well as her historical equivalent), the French Dunkerque is already there at T6. There have also been experiments of moving Cesare to T6 before community opposition stopped that.

And as for gunnery, Novorossiysk is more accurate than Giulio Cesare thanks to "battlecruiser" dispersion. Overmatch potential due to different matchmaking environment is another question though.

[Kruzenstern]

1 hour ago, Project45_Opytny said:

And as for gunnery, Novorossiysk is more accurate than Giulio Cesare thanks to "battlecruiser" dispersion. Overmatch potential due to different matchmaking environment is another question though.

That battlecruiser dispersion is more than offset by a crappy sigma though, Novo has 1.5 Sigma compared to GCs 1.9. As @qkarl said, GC is an infallible sniper, while Novo is lackluster. Also GCs AP hits harder than Novos. And to top it off, GCs concealment is also better and it has more health. All things considered, I would say that GC is the better ship even if they were same tier. Novo at tier6 is just not very good. GC as an OP tier5 would be a mediocre tier6, and Novo is simply worse. Not terrible, but below average. Really nothing to spend money on. And really at tier6 you don't need any BB beyond Mutsu. Imho Mutsu is to tier6 what GC is to tier5. I am actually amazed she is still being sold. But I guess WG doesn't really care about tiers lower than 8 anymore.

[mashed68]

I went ahead and bought the 3 crates to finish the grind. Why? Because I wanted the german and french bb's I could possibly get. I didn't of course, but I did get Iwami from one of the 3. Tier 9 bb for 2200 dubs I acquired for free....not bad.

[Project45_Opytny]

On 1/13/2025 at 8:16 PM, Kruzenstern said:

That battlecruiser dispersion is more than offset by a crappy sigma though, Novo has 1.5 Sigma compared to GCs 1.9. As @qkarl said, GC is an infallible sniper, while Novo is lackluster.

At least my preferred 3rd party chart tool suggests that 1.5 large cruiser is still superior to 1.9 "Continental European".

First impressions and recollections can be misleading at times, for example many players used to think Pensacola has different and superior ballistics than New Orleans and further (actually they are exactly the same, Pensacola just benefits being a tier lower and a shorter range that makes it seems that the shells are still fast enough at the extreme range).

On 1/13/2025 at 8:16 PM, Kruzenstern said:

Also GCs AP hits harder than Novos.

My preferred 3rd party tool suggests that both types of main gun shells are exactly the same (525kg, 320mm, 830 m/s MV, Drag Coefficient 0.4098) for Cesare and Novorossiysk. Other than subjective impressions it's perhaps being at T5, GC has a much easier environment for her 320mm AP (perhaps both overmatch and penetration) than Novorossiysk.

On 1/13/2025 at 8:16 PM, Kruzenstern said:

All things considered, I would say that GC is the better ship even if they were same tier. Novo at tier6 is just not very good. GC as an OP tier5 would be a mediocre tier6, and Novo is simply worse. Not terrible, but below average. Really nothing to spend money on.

Perhaps the original goal of creating premium ship Novorossiysk is just to provide a "re-balanced" Giulio Cesare that would be available to newer players.

The only reason I would propose for purchasing Novorossiysk this time is "to get her with a discount now lest she occupies a random drop from lootboxes".

[Justin_Simpleton]

51 minutes ago, Project45_Opytny said:

Perhaps the original goal of creating premium ship Novorossiysk is just to provide a "re-balanced" Giulio Cesare that would be available to newer players.

Is the Rio de Janeiro supposed to be one of those GC knock-offs?

[mashed68]

1 hour ago, Justin_Simpleton said:

Is the Rio de Janeiro supposed to be one of those GC knock-offs?

GC is Italian, Rio was a British contract made ship for another country. Totally different in almost every way. 

[Ensign Cthulhu]

1 hour ago, Justin_Simpleton said:

Is the Rio de Janeiro supposed to be one of those GC knock-offs?

IRL, Rio de Janeiro was being built for Brazil, which defaulted on her. Offered to the Ottoman Empire, she was repossessed by the British on the outbreak of war, no doubt because of the likelihood that the Ottomans would switch sides and go over to the Germans (which they did, German influence in the region having predated the British decision to hold on to the ship). The British then rechristened her Agincourt.

RDJ and Agincourt are literally the same ship, but they're balanced differently in-game.

2 hours ago, Project45_Opytny said:

Perhaps the original goal of creating premium ship Novorossiysk is just to provide a "re-balanced" Giulio Cesare that would be available to newer players.

They didn't want to entirely waste the work that had gone into trying to rebalance GC at Tier 6. The irony was the name they gave the T6 test version: Giunio Bruto.

[Justin_Simpleton]

2 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

RDJ and Agincourt are literally the same ship, but they're balanced differently in-game.

I see my confusion.  Both Agincourt and GC came to my attention as being some bad-ass ships around the same time for me.  I have Novorossiysk and RDJ and so got them confused.

[Kruzenstern]

21 hours ago, Project45_Opytny said:

At least my preferred 3rd party chart tool suggests that 1.5 large cruiser is still superior to 1.9 "Continental European".

Well I can only draw on the numbers from the shiptool and my experience, and my experience is that GC shoots better spreads than Novo does. But my sample size is small enough that it could be down to plain luck.

Alas, I can actually do more...

I just did a quick experiment in the training room, using a stationary König as target, like this, same position (100m error margin) for both ships, shooting at the same spot amidships:

Shooting AP.

After 5 salvos, Novo had scored 28 hits, GC had 37.

Novo left the König with 1530 HP after 8 salvos and 44 hits. That is an average of 5.5 hit per salvo.

GC left her with 495 HP after 7 salvos and 49 hits. That is 7 hits per salvo.

So the average clearly speaks for GC. (I know, small sample size, but it also fits what I saw in battle).

Big difference: Novo was very consistent, always either 5 or 6 hits per salvo. GC was mostly around 7, but had outiers as low as 4 and as high as 10. I guess that is the effect of one having better base accuracy and worse sigma, and the other having it the other way round. Still the sigma seems to win if it is SO much better as it is in this case. Your preferred 3rd party tool seems to be wrong about something. Or maybe it changes with range because they get different dispersion curves, I wouldn't know about that. At 10ish km range it is very clear that GC accuracy is superior.

 

21 hours ago, Project45_Opytny said:

My preferred 3rd party tool suggests that both types of main gun shells are exactly the same (525kg, 320mm, 830 m/s MV, Drag Coefficient 0.4098) for Cesare and Novorossiysk

that much is true but GCs shell does 9700 damage vs. Novos 9250.

Edited January 15 by Kruzenstern

[Project45_Opytny]

2 hours ago, Kruzenstern said:

After 5 salvos, Novo had scored 28 hits, GC had 37.

Novo left the König with 1530 HP after 8 salvos and 44 hits. That is an average of 5.5 hit per salvo.

GC left her with 495 HP after 7 salvos and 49 hits. That is 7 hits per salvo.

So the average clearly speaks for GC. (I know, small sample size, but it also fits what I saw in battle).

Big difference: Novo was very consistent, always either 5 or 6 hits per salvo. GC was mostly around 7, but had outiers as low as 4 and as high as 10. I guess that is the effect of one having better base accuracy and worse sigma, and the other having it the other way round. Still the sigma seems to win if it is SO much better as it is in this case. Your preferred 3rd party tool seems to be wrong about something. Or maybe it changes with range because they get different dispersion curves, I wouldn't know about that. At 10ish km range it is very clear that GC accuracy is superior.

Well, then it seems that how exactly sigma value affects "expected" dispersion remains not fully understood and this seems to be an interesting case to study further.

iwarship charting tool insists that even taking sigma value into consideration, Novorossiysk (1.5, CB) should still has a slight "expected" dispersion advantage than Giulio Cesare (1.9, European).

Perhaps reasons may include a few lucky salvoes and that somehow sigma value does not influence dispersion in a linear manner and it takes at least some significant sigma value to make an advantageous dispersion formula to be actually advantageous even with slightly lower value than peers (there seems to have no one arguing that Republique, with 2.0, European before the recent buff, is more accurate than St. Vincent, with 1.6, CB; though for this case Republique's higher MV may also play a role).