Affeks
-
Content Сount
1,934 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Battles
8416 -
Clan
[JUNK]
Everything posted by Affeks
-
We Want (Ise 1943 IJN) Battleship Aircraft Carrier
Affeks replied to PatienceTracker's topic in General Discussion
BB with Consumable like button to let you attack a target with simple dive bombs or Fighters. There are tons of threads on these kind of ships already, look them up and read those. Lots of cool ideas and info on why they're not in the game already -
Hey guys I'm looking into the frenchies and there is this one AA gun I'm not sure how it will translate into the game. http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNFR_37mm_m1935.php The article mentions "There was one further 37 mm gun that was under consideration at the time the war started, the 37 mm zénithaux (zenith). This was a Hotchkiss design for a quadruple mounting intended for use against dive bombers. This mounting was unusual in that its platform was tilted at an angle to facilitate high-angle firing and as a result the guns could not depress past +45 degrees. The mounting would have been countersunk in the deck and loaded from beneath, similar in concept to the British BD (Between Deck) designs. The surrender of France in 1940 halted development and this weapon never made it off the drawing board." tl;dr AA gun that can't depress past 45 degrees. The reason I'm inquiring about this gun is that Clemenceau and Gascogne was planned to have two mountings on each ship. The other 37mm AA guns, we already know their range and DPS (which is really good) so I could the old :0.71 ratio calculation on the DPS, but the range is the real question. How do you think these will be ingame/what their range will be?
-
No I'm sorry, my immature [edited]jumped to a conclusion
-
Oh lol, I guess I'm getting a little too used to pointless online flaming haha
-
What the heck are you on about... of course I'm talking about the third Richelieu Class BB ffs Maybe google around before playing the smartass lmao
-
WG hasnt learned a thing over the years... with this line they tried way to hard to make it gimmicky and give them "flavour" I guess. I mean how many stupid gimmicks does RN high tier (+nelson) BBs have at this point. okay lets count. 1, Super concealment. 2, 1/4 HE pen rule. 3, 50% of total AP alpha as HE alpha (as opposed to 33% on US and KM BBs). 4, Super Fire chance for HE shells. 5, reduced AP arm time. 6, Super heals. 7, super low citadel. I mean you can even throw in Conquerors 457mm guns' insane autobounce angles... Okay lets compare that to Izumo's gimmicks. (which has the same shitty 32mm armor that is "super weak" to IFHE 152mm and 203mm Cruiser HE spam) 1, Tighter dispersion at range (but worse at sub 10km). 2, fast shell velocity. 3, 7km secondary range (kinda useless since its 127mm guns suck both in terms of rate of fire, ballistics and firing arcs). 4, 50% of total AP alpha as HE alpha. I mean I cant even add all the weaknesses of the ship to this list as well. You know stuff like Izumo being much larger target than Lion, Citadel is super high in the waterline, AA being worse, max speed and agility much lower, concealment so high its maybe the least stealthy ship in the game, worse sigma etc etc etc. WG just added a shitton of gimmicks on many of these ships and are left with a steaming mess of unbalancable stats and gimmicks that really shouldnt be a part of a BB to start with. WG needs to learn to make tech lines like the French Cruisers more often. Lines that dont completely mess up the balance of the game and dont create either a power creep or lines that are just laughed at. At this rate BBs will steal cruiser strengths away one at a time. They already took Hydro away from KM cruisers, now they take away concealment and HE spam from IJN cruisers as well. Goddamn learn some restraint. Simplicity is an art itself. Less is more ffs I will not play this line as I think its a step in the wrong direction for the development of the game. Edit: tiers 3-6 are fine. 7/8 is debatable due to their super stealth WG is pushing for some reason.
-
I agree. If I remember Mutsu had terrible RoF and Traverse till just before launch where they gave her average traverse and RoF instead
-
I hope this aint true, Wichita is such a perfect premium candidate
-
Absolutely not! I mean what is not to love about french BBs. Fast, agile, unique turrets and layouts, unique secondary layouts with many being centerlined, good guns and most of all they are all sexy. Youre right, you can even throw Clemenceau on the list haha
-
Its mostly down the the way less convenient turret layout and the fact that quad turrets would have way worse firing angles compared to the narrower twin turrets you can find on Bmarck or even triples found on NC. That combined with the lack of a latewar refit and the 25mm plating that it would get by being tier 7 would be enough. I mean you badically have the same situation with KGV at tier 7 and Monarch at tier 8. Both similar ship, but slightly different guns, plating and AA is enough. The most important reason that I want Gasgogne at tier 7 is that we have Jean Bart that needs to be a tier 8 prem.
-
Wg removed the sick autobounce angles on Conqueror's 419mm guns. So now only the 457mm guns have the 60 degree autobounce angle or whatever it was. Its a step in the right direction, but I wonder if its enough.
-
Im gone for a couple days and it seems christmas here already. Nice finds Im also on bord with 1927 37 000t 3x4 305mm ship at tier 6 and 1928 37 000t 3x2 406mm at tier 7. 17 000 t cruiser killer would be a tier 7 if it gets the same tool and classification as Graf Spee. As a BB it would even struggle at tier 5. The 23 000t 2x3+1x4 305mm ship seems like a small upgrade over the 17k one. So if the 17k one is placed say tier 6 then 23k one should land a tier higher. 23 000t is way to small for even a low tier BB, so it needs some cruier love to survive imo Gascogne is still a tier 7 prem candidate though.
-
Id say that we get them next year, they add about one BB line every year. Then again WG might just add russian battleships next instead of french battleship. In that case we might need to wait another year.
-
Considering how many cruisers with 25mm armor I'd say it would be OP, that or they have to really hit the accuracy hard and I generally dont like shotgun ships. But yeah for me its a close second place, Id rather want it over 450mms
-
The barrels are calculated based on damage values on the existing quad bofors mounts found on US ships. I ensure you I did not cheat by taking "single 40mm bofor=4dps therefore quaf 40mm bofor=16dps". This is as accurate as you get it. That AA rating i mention is a simple yet flawed "long range dps×range+mid range dps×range..." so it doest take into accout that long range AA benefits more from MFCAA and AFT as well as the fact that TB squads will rarely get closer than 1km thus further reduce value of short range AA. Still I find it to be an easy indicator of AA power on high tier ships. Danton wont be in the line, it really isnt tier 3 material and WG themselves said pre dreadnoughts wont be in the game except for a few exceptions (Mikasa). On the other hand WG could prolly use a paper design for tier 3/4 instead of using paper for tier 6/7. In this case I guess its pick your poison. Personally I dont want to see a gimmicky 16 gun design with no other redeeming factors or room for reasonable refits.
-
Roma - Tier VIII Premium Italian BB suggestion
Affeks replied to ImperialAdmiral's topic in Battleships
I feel WG is kinda too afraid to introduce guns with higher RoF than 25 RPM. Mean that'll have to change when they make a swedish DD line as one of the high tiers basically rely on the fact that its guns had something like 40-50 rpm or something. As for secondaries they can just limit the range if they overperform with the fire starting...idk why they have to limit a potentially fun gimmick like that which wouldnt shake the game balance in any way... -
Roma - Tier VIII Premium Italian BB suggestion
Affeks replied to ImperialAdmiral's topic in Battleships
Yep also wondering whether they make the 76.2mm on Agano-class/Light carrier Ibuki DP or not, but looking at the ships you mentioned they will surely be DPs. Still wish they gave guns like the Minotaurs 76.2mm guns DP capabilities. The insane RoF would make for cool fireworks and the low HE pen would make sure its anything but OP. I dont expect it to happen but would be fun to see 8, 3" guns firing at 90 rpm -
Roma - Tier VIII Premium Italian BB suggestion
Affeks replied to ImperialAdmiral's topic in Battleships
The 90mm guns will be DP guns right? I checked navweaps but could only find info on AA ammo. They listed surface range @45 degrees. Im guessing the AA round is shrapnel based rather than HE based so.... Im dying to know this as modernized Andrea Doria and Roma are my two fav italian ships. -
You are partly correct, however one of the most important factors is shell weight AND as you said drag. Shell speed/velocity is basically meaningless at long range if drag/weight are both good. But you are correct as US cruisers and Destroyers plunge way more than they in theory should due to astronomical shell drag. Then again that has more to due with national flavour rather than spesific gun characteristics.
-
.... Smaller shells plunge more at longer range... So if you just think twice youll find that 419s are better at plunging fire than 457s because 457s have flatter arcs. Edit: found out 457s have faster AP shell velocity (15m/s faster) which means? You guessed it, even flatter arcs.
-
I thought this was going to be a thread about why Lexington doesnt have a hull option with the original giant secondary gun... Not that I think about it I wanna make a thread about Lexingtons sister as a proposed premium tier 7 ship with said secondary guns
-
I think this line drawing is pretty close to what that refit would look like With this rework the AA would look like this: 2x2+3x4 130mm, 53.8dps@5.2km 10x4 40mm, 159dps@3.5km 34 20mm, 122.4dps@2km AA rating: 1081 This is quite strong, up there with Gneisenau's AA rating of 1110 This is also very similar to Richelieu's rework which left all the DP guns untouched, but strengthened the mid/low caliber guns significantly. The only way I see to save Normandie/Lyon is that WG gives a fantasy modernization upgrade to the 13.5" guns that make them actually usefull. If that were the case then I believe that Normandie could take tier 6 and Bratagne could stay at tier 5. I think Lyon with 16 guns really shouldnt be in the game, that many guns on a BB is either super bad or really OP. Normandie on the other hand could work well with upgraded guns. Also hurray for 3x4 tier 10 ship. I read somewhere that a study revealed that any quad turret with guns bigger than 15" would be very unpractical and were thus never considered on any french design... But i dont care, I wanna see a quad 16" turret damn it
-
You know thats just plain wrong. The 419s much better HE capabilities make it better against angled BBs AND the 419s smaller caliber makes it much easier to get normal pens against superstructures. Which is what you aim at against angling BBs that you cant overmatch. The ONLY thing the 457s has is that it overmatches the 30mm threshold, but only some cruisers has that armor (Zao, DM), but against those kinda targets the 50% bigger shell number is much more valuable.
-
We all know that, but why ever pick the 457s now lmao, its worse at evrything compared to 419s..
-
An Open Suggestion to Wargaming – The Nelson-class battleships, Premiums, and Tech trees
Affeks replied to Asmodaeus's topic in Battleships
Sorry, Nelson really isnt tier 8 material and N3 isnt tier 10 material. You should research more on how historical stats translate to gameplay stats.
