Jump to content

Brutoni

Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    2464

About Brutoni

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Insignia
  1. Brutoni

    About King George V and armour angling...

    The way they have handled Nelson, KGV, Lion etc is awful. It's just a blatent disregard for historical designs that could have been perfectly functional. That same disregard was obviously a decision to allow "gimmicks" to happen.
  2. Brutoni

    Missouri or British Battleships

    Avoid POS RN BBs. Gimmicks instead of solid authentic gameplay has f***ed them. Good job Wargaming. Good job.
  3. Brutoni

    New ship preview: Monarch

    Agree. Is horrible to see warships like the KGV and Lion mauled so badly.
  4. Brutoni

    New ship preview: Monarch

    I just don't understand why!?
  5. Brutoni

    British Battleships

    The KGV armour is not historical. In the armour viewer KGV has totally a historical weather deck armour, foreward bulkhead armour, aft bulkhead armour. She is missing her steering gear armoured section, her splinter deck (citadel) is too thing. Her main deck is not present at all. Her extended main deck (ie it ran over the citadel fwd and aft) is also not present. Turrets are not properly distributed. Belt extension not high enough. Why are wargaming making completely inaccurate statements?
  6. Brutoni

    New ship preview: Monarch

    Alarming this T7 to T10 "rely on stealth over armour" opinion is so strange. And how can they say the armour is totally historically accurate, that is literally a false statement. Take KGV. The armour is not historical. In the armour viewer KGV has totally ahistorical weather deck armour, foreward bulkhead armour, aft bulkhead armour. She is missing her steering gear armoured section, her splinter deck (citadel) is too thing. Her main deck is not present at all. Her extended main deck (ie it ran over the citadel fwd and aft) is also not present. Turrets are not properly distributed. Belt extension not high enough. Why make completely inaccurate statements and why make a ship so poorly armoured.
  7. Brutoni

    British Battleship line for 2017?

    Not STS. Cemented armour. Need to improve the armour viewer. Can see the main deck on the T3 - T6 RN BBs. I suspect real reason is the "flavour" of Stealth and backstabbing at high tiers.
  8. Brutoni

    Missouri or British Battleships

    British BB line is a historical and has inaccurate armour model past Tier 6. With key classes missing. Key classes having unrealistically weak armour and such like. I'd get Missouri tbh.
  9. Brutoni

    British Battleship line for 2017?

    So, is anyone else really concerned having looked at the armour viewer in game? The British BBs are now available to look at and you can also access the ingame armour. The reason I say concerned is because while looking at KGV I noticed her armour layout appears incorrect. 1) The weather deck over the citadel is way too thin. 2) The splinter deck above machinery and ammunition compartments is also way too thin. 3) She appears to have no main deck (I'm sure that is just a limitation of armour viewer and her main deck of over 6inches is present)? 4) She has no overhang of the main deck past the fwd and aft bulkeads. In the real ship this extended almost all the way forward and was 2.5inch (62mm) thick 5) She has no stearing gear armoured box that was present in real life 6) Her turret armour is not quite correct from what I can see, although that is mostly a few mm here and there. 7) Her 5-6inch extension to the main belt is present deep below the waterline but not shallow below the waterline. The whole point of the extension was the protect the water line. Due to these mistakes the Monarch and Lion suffer from the same issues. Anyone shed any light on this?
  10. Before we gave them the magnetron they were limited. Which is what I originally said. Apologies if that was not the case. The fact being by the time the USN was testing 1st generation Radar the RN already had already used 1st Gen in combat and was developing 2nd gen radar. As for the history of the magnetron, that is quite a bit longer than we should discuss in this topic. As to the individual who says radar came from a "death ray". Almost immediately scientists pointed out a more practicable use of EM waves. That point is always over egged.
  11. Brutoni

    From Reddit: British BBs at last!

    ​Curious. Where did you get the 65 20mm Orelikons as the 1944 configuration for the ship. More specifically WHICH ship are you quoting this as the configuration. I only ask because a large number of the KGV by 1944 had had the 20mm Oerlikons removed entirely for around 20 40mm BOFORS (20x1) and another 16-24 40mm pom-poms (4-6 x 4). I think you might be talking about Anson in her pacific July 1944 - March 1945 configuration but I'm of the opinion that Howe's 1945 refit would be better for T8 play removing all 20mm for 6x4 40mm pom-poms with power train and radar fire control as well as 18x1 40mm Bofors in the Mk.III mount. ​20mm is just too short ranged for Tier 8 play. (This is assuming the currently defunct pom-pom is improved to 3.0km instead of 2.5km)
  12. ​First nation to mount it. First nation to come up with a proper way for it to be utilised through every level of command, ie tactical, operational and strategic (most well known example being Battle of Britain but the Battle of the Atlantic is another cracking example). First nation to proper understand the limits in Radar were not due to equipment but the human attempting to understand the data and start to develop MMI to allow exploitation. I mean we could go on. The US had some interesting theories but didn't use Magnetrons until we showed them one which SEVERELY limited their radar range and potential. ​So take your sarcastic tone, take you "holier than thou" attitude and stow it for sea shipmate. If you want a serious discussion I am more than happy to do so, I mean hell the Germans had demonstrated the use of EM Waves for range prediction and target detection from as far back as 1888 IIRC.
  13. Not to mention you don't know what that damage was? Was it just fire damage and did he have a flag? If so then you are looking at a huge amount of damage that you can get back. Hell Warspite players will know that with the right skills you don't use repair on fires (as you will only ever get maximum of 3) unless the situation is dire. Let her burn, kill the cruiser then repair the damage. Seems similar. ​If any nation deserves Radar on BB I would argue it is the Brits for obvious reasons. However there is of course the game balance issues associated with that.
  14. ​I know and understand the GAME mechanic. Which is a GAME mechanic and not a REAL LIFE mechanic. ​As I said, seems like an issue with the engine and the way armour mechanics are handled. You are creating a very arcade system that is trying to account for some really advanced aspects of ballistics but then makes sweeping generalisations of other aspects of ballistics (shall we have a wind model now as well ). In any event despite overmatch not working with Hood she seems to have a high average damage model and super structures are always a vulnerable area to target, perhaps I am just used to playing a RN CL (I am aware they have "different AP rounds". ​Everybody is making a big deal of a T8 KGV but historically there is no reason she is not a match for the likes of Tirptiz, Sharnhorst, Bismark, Amagi and others. Most of who are placed in Tier 8.
  15. ​Sounds like a gameplay issue to me. 14inch shells should have no issue penetrating cruisers.
×