SeaMonsterUK

As you can see, I mentioned ship, nothing about class.

I said the ship is defined by her main armament. I never mentioned class.

I said the ship, not the class

As I said before, it would hardly be the first sister ship with different armament, take the Dido-class or Danae-class for example.

Differences between Scharn and Gneis, with different main armament, would primarily be in length. But at the same time, one cannot become the other. But, they both remain sister ships despite any change in armament or general size.

I could go there yes, but at the same time, the Gneis was planned to have her guns upgraded to 15" during reconstruction, but she wouldn't be the first class of ship to not share the same main armament as her sister ship(s).

The KGV as it stands, is 7.5, that is taking into account the armour layout of the ship, the AA suite and the main armament. If not for that latter point, it would be tier 8 plain and simple. and the same would go if North Carolina (BB-55) was to recieve her original triple or quadruple 14" armament. But yes, a ship is defined by her guns, specifically those that make up her main battery.

"At what point does a ship become a new ship?" - When you change any part of it to fit into a game or when you lay down the keel, but the question isn't necessarily about whether at which point you create a new ship, but what MAKES the ship, and that is really down to opinion, in my eyes, it wouldn't be a KGV without the main armament.

In my opinion yes. As well as her complement of Secondary guns.

My assumption of the position is the only way KGV will exist at Tier 8 will be with 3 triple 15" or 16" main battery. And I don't look at KGV for the AA or armour, but that iconic 14" battery.

Yes. Her full AA suite would be too strong for tier 7 carriers.

Her AA is going to take a nerf at tier 7.

Pretty much. Also another thing to look at is the technical difficulties with the Quad Turrets, which could equal a higher rotation time for the turrets or higher dispersion of shells at longer ranges.

She will probably dominate in a close range brawl, but both Colorado and Gneisenau with the 16" mk5 and 15" SK C/34 will balance her out quickly. Also, she will have to show most of her side to get a full broadside with her guns.

KGV's 14" guns would not work at Tier 8, even with any kind of overbuff it would need ti recieve, WG prefer game balance over historical accuracy yes, but they also put immersion into consideration as well, and over buffing the 14" guns to the point you want to over buff them too, would break that immersion. It either stays at Tier 7, or it receives either the 15" or 16" guns for tier 8.

I'm going purely by facts. And that is exactly what the facts say. The 14" gun is not as good as what people are trying to make out, and I doubt WG will make a gun perform better than it does when a gun it is on par with performance wise is a tier below.

They'd have to give it the 15" guns straight up, or 16" guns but that is the only way it will be Tier 8.

Size of the gun is no object, it's the performance of the weapon. So yes, a gun that is on par with a gun 3" smaller does happen, espiecally when it comes to naval weapons and how they perform, granted a 14" gun will deliver more power per shot. However, no 11" or 14" gun that I know of would work at tier 8.

The 11" guns of the Germans have better belt penetration, where the 14" guns have deck armour penetration. Both guns are on par with each other. You cannot put 1 gun above the other when they are both on par. And the KGV can work at Tier 7, but the guns CANNOT work at Tier 8. And in terms of Historical Accuracy, it was inferior to the Bismarck and North Carolina-class Battleships.

What is does show is that British 14" guns would be incapable of performing on par with any of the ships at tier 8. Also, Tennesse-class Battleships are also very good candidates for a Tier 7 battleship with excellent AA. 8x2 5"/38 41x1 20mm Oerlikon 10x4 40mm Bofors

Also, AP stats for the 14"/50 Mk 16 shell, fun fact, 14"/50 Mark B was planned for use on USS North Carolina in Quad Turrets. 0 yards (0 m) (new gun) 28.03" (712 mm) --- 2,700 fps (823 mps) 0 0 yards (0 m) (avg. gun) 27.17" (690 mm) --- 2,625 fps (800 mps) 0 5,000 yards (4,572 m) 23.66" (601 mm) 0.48" (12 mm) 2,326 fps (709 mps) 2.36 10,000 yards (9,144 m) 20.12" (511 mm) 1.27" (32 mm) 2,040 fps (622 mps) 5.61 15,000 yards (13,716 m) 16.76" (426 mm) 2.13" (54 mm) 1,789 fps (545 mps) 10.23 20,000 yards (18,288 m) 13.75" (349 mm) 3.02" (77 mm) 1,588 fps (484 mps) 16.33 25,000 yards (22,860 m) 11.27" (286 mm) 4.05" (103 mm) 1,455 fps (443 mps) 24.08 30,000 yards (27,432 m) 9.29" (236 mm) 5.31" (135 mm) 1,390 fps (424 mps) 33.0 35,000 yards (32,004 m) 7.82" (199 mm) 6.97" (177 mm) 1,402 fps (427 mps) 42.5

In real life, it's a death warrant for ANY ship to be caught alone or without sufficient escort ships, not just battleships.

In real life, they may have been the most advanced guns in World War 2, in fact even in real life they were quite lacking in comparison to the 15" guns of the QE class which were World War 1 guns, and most likely in game the same will be true, the 14" guns were not that good of a gun. BL 14" Mark VII 0 yards (0 m) 26.9" (668 mm) --- 10,000 yards (9,144 m) 15.6" (396 mm) 1.15" (29 mm) 15,000 yards (13,716 m) 13.2" (335 mm) 1.95" (50 mm) 20,000 yards (18,288 m) 11.2" (285 mm) 2.85" (73 mm) 25,000 yards (22,860 m) 9.5" (241 mm) 4.00" (102 mm) 28,000 yards (25,603 m) --- 4.75" (121 mm) BL 15" Mark I APC shells (Queen Elizabeth Class) 0 yards (0 m) 27.1" (687 mm) --- 10,000 yards (9,144 m) 16.5" (422 mm) 1.25" (32 mm) 15,000 yards (13,716 m) 13.9" (353 mm) 1.95" (50 mm) 20,000 yards (18,288 m) 11.7" (297 mm) 3.10" (72 mm) 25,000 yards (22,860 m) 10.2" (259 mm) 4.30" (121 mm) 30,000 yards (27,432 m) 9.0" (229 mm) 5.70" (145 mm)

Tier 7 game play is very different to tier 8 game play. And 380mm is 15" and battleships are completely different beasts compared to cruisers.

And this is how I suspect the full tree will look minus 1 carrier branch and the entire DD branch.