mr3awsome

Old, but not obsolete. Very comparable to the old destroyers the RN was using as convoy escorts. Speed could also have been an issue too.

Its not actually less armoured than the QEs and Rs though. Thats what made Hood so revolutionary. The original Fast Battleship.

The Weapon class aren't as bad off as you think. Their actual speed is 34kts (Its not blistering, but its adequate), and before they became ASW focussed they had a third twin 4" mount. Not only this but the Weapon's 4" twins received an RPC upgrade, which increased their traverse speed. This in turn increases their AA rating in game, as can be seen by comparing the 4" twins on Belfast to those on Edinburgh. This essentially makes Weapon an Akizuki with slightly worse guns, but a little extra speed, whilst trading a gun mount for a torpedo mount.

However it has now torps, so tier IV would probably be for the best.

Lord_Fisher, on 16 October 2016 - 03:19 PM, said: "Oh it's a CL line". Well yes it does appear to be, but actually it's described as the cruiser line, with no distinction made. Thats because there has been no cause to. No other nation can field a complete CL line. By the same extension its widely believed that in the future the RN will have a line of battle-cruisers, but those will have the same marker as battleships in game. Thus your point is irrelevant. Wrong again. The Kents, Londons and Norfolks are all tier VII material. Their direct equivalents, the Myoukous and Pensacolas are both there, so its the most sensible course. There are distinct differences between Fiji, Belfast and Neptune. These range from the protection scheme to the secondary battery to the electrical power supply. Saying otherwise betrays your ignorance of these designs. On the contrary, its very representative of the period in question, from the 1910s to the classes of WWI, then the classes of the 30s and the classes of WWII. Heavy cruisers cover a much smaller area. On the contrary. It shows that they are implementing lines whole with a minimum of splitting up in face of later expansion like some of the older lines will face. So what if they have the battle-cruisers first, so no QE, Nelson or KGV? They will come sooner or later, and have something more diverse should help variety.

Alaska I would put at tier VII. Graf Spee I would put at tier VI, but as a cruiser.

What would probably work better: Germany UK Plus assorted paper ships.

The Mk V is the mount, not the gun. Said mount can rotate and elevate faster than the US Twin. Hence it having a higher rating is hardly unexpected. Yes, but at the same time 4 2pdr Mk II singles can out DPM an octuple 2pdr Mk VIII.

Its unlikely just be a wave of the wand, any of the series of designs from F2 to O3 (Nelson) can receive refits to make them better suited to the tier they're at. Such as: F2 & F3 just being parallel to Nelson during her life. J3 getting a refit a la Hood. M2 getting the Nelson treatment, but the ship is larger so more can be carried. G3 & N3 getting something along the vein of the proposed Rodney rebuild, with the 5.25" twins. L3, K2, I3 & H3A getting something along the vein of the proposed Rodney rebuild, but with either 4.5" twins or US 5"/38s or 5"/54s.

Correct. It wouldn't be the first time that WG fudged something to make a ship better. The loading cycle is 30s. The low rates of fire are due to issues with the mounts and the crews. Both of which work perfectly for the purpose of the game. All of which puts KGV is a reasonable position. 29kts, 10 guns, reasonable (if low end) penetration, strong armour, strong AA (aside from stock).

They are called supercharges. So yes, yes you can.

Its a hard kill. By the time Bismarck was torpedoed and the scuttling charges went off the ship was already going under. It only sped up the inevitable.

KGV would have a better drag value than Warspite, due to having more aerodynamic (6/12crh vs 5/10crh) shells.

philjd, on 06 October 2016 - 09:02 AM, said: Its a very different type of steel though...., so not worth '457mm' of armour Armour type isn't differentiated between in game, however, so it would count as 457mm armour. Unfortunately they aren't as good as the German 105mm. Still, they should be quite annoying for close range attackers. 7 x 2 9.5 @ 5.0km 3 x 8 20 @ 2.5km 4 x 4 2 @ 1.2km Unfortunately the AA still ends up worse than Warspite because of how shafted the quad Vickers is.

As someone who has been here for , I can safely say that they have no idea what they are doing. Or at least minimal forward planning.

Birmingham is definitely the weak link, but it is more than just an extra gun over Weymouth. The midships guns are higher. You have a belt as well as a deck. You get the guns from Caledon, Danae & Emerald rather than the ones on Weymouth. Plus Adelaide opens up a lot of options for the class in terms of upward growth.

Warning, Large Shell.

The aft hit on the starboard side seems the closest to the hit on VV, its almost the same place, just a little higher. Theres no denying that the crew of the VV did a good, and I didn't mean to take any credit away from them (if it came across like that).

Its definitely the closest one to it, but its still not equivalent.

Wrong. Vanguard is a 1938 project, same as the Lions. The major change is the rearrangement of the shell rooms & magazines. In Hood's half sisters this bulked out the hull form, with them loosing 0.75kts as a result, but should probably turn better as a result. Its not a lot, but knowing WG, anything is possible. I'd hardly say that she acquired targets quickly in the 2nd engagement, given that she didn't actually hit anything. She sank due to shelling damage. She was sinking before Dorsetshire torpedoed her, and before the crew set off the scuttling charges. The first torpedo that PoW took would doom pretty much any battleship. Its telling that the more weakly protected Repulse sunk first, despite being hit after PoW. Can't let history stand in the way of theory crafting.

Whilst the Kents did have a 4.5" armoured belt, its so narrow its barely going to be felt. Which is why they went for the 3.5" belt on the London rebuild. Thinner, but it'll actually cover a decent area.

Norman Friedman's The British Battleship. afaik, a shell might be deflected down by the belt through the TDS, including the bulkhead, meaning that it wouldn't be (as) effective.

The belt is quite narrow. When they were considering rebuilding her (this is before the war), they considered making the belt larger, but external like that of the KGVs. The rebuilds of the Nelsons offer potential for a tier VIII premium.

Sims died in 1936 and was a known Anglophile. King on the other hand, was a known Anglophobe.

Changing back to the inferior Mk 1 guns from the Mk 2s wouldn't make sense, unlike Gneisenau. I'd say that given hulls a la Amagi So Dak 1920 can manage at tier IX.