piritskenyer

I'm more about pure warships as well ("an egg has no business dancing with rocks"), but the question was asked, and I thought I'd give my opinion. I for one find DAM/DEMs, armed fleet support ships and auxiliary warships interesting as well, just not really viable in the game's parameters. They could be interesting as low tier gift ships or mission ships, but they would be utterly useless in their respective time period against ships that were purposefully built for war and thus have every available advantage on their side.

No, no, not at all, that's why I don't think ships like that could ever be viable at anything higher than T2. the largest purpose-built warship Kormoran could have concievably beaten, would have been a pre-WW1 light cruiser, one like SMS Emden, or HMS Active, but nothing even remotely in their own time period. In other words they would hack it in T2 and not anywhere else. If that is a waste of time for you, suit yourself.

I once multiple-citadelled an Aoba with Nagato secndaries

USS Cimarron was an armed fleet oiler, not a ship designed for actual combat, and just refitted with defensive armament, while Kormoran was purposefully rebuilt as a disguised commerce raider with extensive armament fitted (6x1x 150mm/45 guns, an assortment of 20 and 37mm guns and 2x3x 533mm torpedo tubes). The main problem Kormoran would have is that she'd be slow (18kts), and absolutely unarmoured. IMO both Kormoran and Cimarron could hack it as T2 prem ships.

@SN as far as I'm aware, they wouldn't have been able to, due to the rotating structure interfering with the fiixed structure at some point. I know that the 15" Mk I turrets would have been absolutely incapable od doing a 360, and i also assume it would be the case for the 13.5" guns' turrets.

@SmartassNoob They couldn't have brought the turret all the way around because of the internal arrangement of the turrets.

Akizuki: 21Benson: 27Lo Yang (Mk. 15 mod. 0): 24Lo Yang (Mk 31): 17Z-23: 14Mogami (155mm): 13 + 1 - properly set up she's a giggle to play, even if not exactly a carry boat.Atago: 31Chapayev: 22Mikhail Kutuzov: 26 Admiral Hipper / Prinz Eugen: 6Edinburgh: 18Amagi: 22North Carolina: 23Tirpitz: 23Bismarck: 21Shokaku (2/2/2): 25Shokaku (3/1/2): 17 The only ship I wanted to downvote is already out, so...

Because you guys have put in logic, knowledge and research instead of repeating *one* thing over and over again. Also, you guys are knowledgeable, and thus are on a higher level in my eyes when it comes to discussion.

Joke's on you, as you are the one who doesn't seem to get where he belongs... Pretty ballsy trying to downtalk people like Trainspite, Earl_of_Northesk, Exocet6951 and Historynerd...

Yes, well, Nathan Okuns pen tables are basically compiled output data of his facehard calculator program, which is derived of the USN empirical formula, which, as demonstrated by Trainspite, is not always on point.

Also, come to think of it... 26ky, angle of fall is 32, angle of attack is 58, which is pretty far from ideal, and tests show 12" of side armour penetration, which would mean about 1.3x the distance travelled, or about 15-16" of material travel. 14" weak he said. Won't be able to pen he said.

Look it up in the compiled pen tables of Nathan Okun, it will be giving you the values in relation to the target (example: complete penetration against British Face Hardened plate or qhat have you)

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_14-45_mk7.php http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_16-45_mk1.php Not sure if relevant, but there are tidbits about the 14" in the 16"/45 article

Only 2 penetrations at long range befire Hood was sunk. Damn that made me lol. How many shots fired, how many hits and how much time into the engagement?

Could be balanced with reduced RoF and the same dreadful turret speed. I'm guessing that would be nice. Also 9x155 on either side.

You'd be unable, as you'd get banned after the first full ship sunk I believe

2.2-2.3 would be the ideal to compensate for a low projected alpha (my guess is around 10600), which would allow for higher [theoretical!] DPM than Bismarck, which in turn would probably would be on par or lower in practice because of the overmatch mechanics.

Like a freaking broken record, I swear to god...

That would probably mostly affect CL's and DD's and especially at high tiers, where a CL or a DD could burn through their entire supply of ammo in less time than the match would last... CA's, BB's and CV's would probably not feel it much (except maybe Des Moines), as they don't fire/rearm fast enough to go through their magazines...

Mate, this is a ship game, not a history game. See the difference? If we were to go by your example, then tell me what did postwar Soviet cruisers do again to warrant their inclusion?

Yeah, well, the 0-0-0 earnings and exactly square damage would give you away

I can't express myself without being chewed out for bad language, so I'll just say this: If you think the 14" guns would be insufficient at T8, look at what people were saying about Scharnhorst cca a year ago (hint: "those guns are wayyy small for a BB, hurpadurpadurp") and look at her stats now (hint-hint: best WR, best K/D, best dmg amongst T7 BB's) The 14" guns will prolly not be the best guns on the tier, but they won't suck the proverbial backside as much as tano is trying to make them out to be.

Would like to see a replay of that... Is there even enough HP to go around for a guy to get 410k dmg in a match at that tierspread?

Yes, well, the RN believed that the naval treaties would ensure the 14" main calibres on future warships. As we know, the brits pretty much fell flat on their ar$e in that case, and ended up with a rather average weapon, while the US, Japan and Germany had developed and improved on their larger calibre weaponry.

4x4x 15" *might* be the French thing, nobody actually knows. Even in the French forums there are people for and against it, the against people mainly arguing that it would require a ship the size of the TX DEDD to realistically accommodate. I'm for it purely because of the unparalleled firedensity, and if Dunkerque is anything to go by, coupled with great gun and ship handling. @VC: WGs claim was to never go over 460mm,which is larger than 18". Nothing was said about another potential 18"-armed ship...