Move Atlanta to BR 5.7 or 6.0

The Dido does not compare favourably to the Atlanta.

Firstly Dido does not have a similar number of guns, Dido has 5 twin turrets, Atlanta has a broadside of 7 twin turrets. which is 4 guns over the Dido

Next Dido has less than half the firerate on the first stage and then only 66% of the firerate during the second stage… On less guns.

Dido has at best equal armour with only the machinery being armoured fully and lacks the US antifragmentation armour which effectively nullifies most small calibre HE shells found on ships below 5.7 with just as weak turrets but probably armoured ammunition.

Dido has less crew, Dido does have better torpedo’s which is a factor but its nowhere near as important as any of the above points. Dido does have better SAP but again it doesn’t offset everything else.

You mention muzzle velocity but you fail to mention that within 10 seconds of being hit by a shell from a broadside Atlanta, you will have received no less than 28 rounds which is more than enough to kill most ships.

You also fail to mention that at range dispersion is a bigger factor so if someone miraculously manages to accurately aim for an ammunition rack then dispersion becomes a factor.

Leander and Arethusa have 6 inch guns with either 3 or 4 turrets and a firerate that is a third of the Atlanta… they also again have roughly equal armour and again better torpedo’s with 2 smaller calibre secondaries.

The comparison is again not favourable.

And again Arethusa and Leander are somewhat on par with things like Karlsruhe which has an extra gun, better torpedo’s and secondary guns which are slightly smaller in calibre but with a vastly higher firerate

1 Like

Coming from the guy from who’s actually used both of them.

The Dido and Atlanta are honestly about par, sans Dido has better torpedoes at the cost of the British Cruiser Bridge.

The Arethusa has no place at it’s current BR seeing as it is literally an inferior Leander and thus has nothing to do with the Atlanta being par or not…I’m pretty really sure I had already said that and you elected not to read it.

Oh look, I did, in the quote, that you quoted.

Not entirely sure how to put this, but maybe…just maybe, try reading things in their proper context.

Or at very least be bothered to go into the game to double-check if a German Cruiser has a turtleback armor scheme before making claims that the Atlanta has more protection than it does.

Granted, -all- of their armor is only good at stopping most DD rounds from instant-karmaing them and that’s about it. Which I’m beginning to suspect you don’t really play much Naval or at that BR range given how fixated you are on it.

These aren’t tanks. The difference between 20mm belt armor isn’t -as- important as things like Crew count and turtleback armor and ammo rack location.

In addition, Secondary Guns on these cruisers are a joke, using them as a means of ‘balancing weight’ furthers the concept that you really aren’t used to playing any of them, or at their BR.

Finally, The Atlanta is a walking, talking Ammo rack waiting to get exploded. Much like most of the early US Cruisers, Lotta Bark, but they tend to crumple when hit by something bigger than a 4" cannon.

And you really ought to actually read my opinion on the Dido v Atlanta given that I’ve used both, and fought on both sides of that fence, I say this to point out it’s pretty obvious you didn’t take the time to read the “whoever shoots first, wins” nature of them at close range.

So, I’ll say it again.

Play the BR, Play the other cruisers -then- talk. Arethusa needs more of a Down BR than the Atlanta needs an up-BR in either case. And maybe the Japanese don’t deserve the Long-Lance Tax in general.