pzkpfwv1d

I beg to contradict and differ but not all random matches have 5 battleships, today I have played several matches with either 3 or 4 battles ships, therefore this thread is a complaint about nothing or a storm in a tea cup

The only reason people use HE on the RN BB's is because of the short fuse on the AP, if the AP fuse was the same as every other battleship, this would not be a complaint It also appears that WG have done something to the disciplinary penalty. Firing at another BB from Iron Duke, shots were hitting the enemy BB but I ended up with a teamkill penalty. Appeal and asked for replay videos, however, nobody will explain how to get a replay videos in the WG staff Therefore, thoroughly disgusted and thinking of possibly quitting the game

Well, it finally installed, no problems when it was installed but RN BB's are not that great and none of them have assigned commanders

Another FUBAr, just hope WG are going to compensate the player who have premium time on there accounts

I play battlewagons and generally I am aggressive, however, if I find myself facing multiple opponents I will use the reverse but continue to engage, I generally find that most people who play the game have no idea that teamwork will win any engagement unless you are really unlucky. Scenario's people do not understand that the object of the scenario is to complete the primary tasks, was castigated by team members in one engagement because I stayed in the engagement area and shot at all opponents rather than charge round the battlefield willy nilly. Lo and behold all the other team members were destroyed, however, because I kept up with the objective, the engagement was a victory

Somewhere I read that the Germans actually looked at autoloading 3.4" guns for AA and close defence with a fire rate somewhere about 1.5 seconds per shot Now think what a destroyer armed with these could do at lose range 40 high velocity armour piercing shells per gun at less than 2km range would spoil most peoples day even the heaviest armoured battleship as the shells chew there way through the armour plate

I have looked through the various threads on the forum and can not find anything about them Can someone please explain how they can be achieved and why they were introduced

The first mission is in Ships for Tea 3 is restricted to the following Cruisers of T4 Destroyers of T4 Carriers of T4 therefore the sink by Bismark will not count as it is not part of the mission parameters

The price for the Graf Zepplin seems excessive for what it actually is Also, why O why have WG downgraded the best divebomber from the European theatre so that it is now virtually useless for the task intendend I am sure that the various JU87 aces are now turning in there graves I am also sure that the Royal Navy would have much preferred the Illustrious being the target of the revised JU87 rather than the actual JU87 that was in operation at the time. If the revised JU87 had been in operation I am sure that Illustrious would not have spent the next 9 months or so undergoing repairs in a US Shipyard and would thus have accompanied the Prince of Wales and Repulse to Singapore which might have altered the outcome of theat engagement as well

Kongo is a good ship in T5, you must learn to play to her best advantages, I admit I am not the best player around, probably far from it, but the best way to play any BB is to present as small a target to the enemy as possible, then unless you are very unlucky you do not suffer mega damage against single opponents. If you find yourself faced by several opponents, retreat

There is not that much difference, certainly not enough to justify the price increases T5 cruisers £12.00 - averaged T5 battleships £17.00 averaged T6 Cruisers £18.00 - averaged (50% increase) T6 battleships - £23.00 averaged (30% increase) T7 cruisers £30.00 - averaged (66% increase) T7 carriers £33.00 averaged T8 cruisers £35.00 - averaged (17.5% increase) T7 battleships £37.00 averaged (60% increase) T8 battleships £41.00 (11% increase) The largest percentage increase in price per unit of individual ships appears to be from T6 to T7, however, I do not think that the actual ships are 2/5ths better than the T6 equivalents

I am British and want the entire line, but some of the ships are too expensive - or not available all the time I have premium ships - not sure exactly how many but they must make up approximately 14% of the entire complement of ships in harbour (never get rid of a ship as you never know when that quest that is ideal for that particular ship might actually be released) I do not play Tier's 1,2 and 3 that much but they are still in port just in case Could do with Kaga being re-released or a special container prize (last one was more than 200 containers ago so I should be due one any time now) Could also do with more premium DD's being released as destroyer arm is relatively weak in fleet WG - please fix the problems that are current with CV's

I play everything, results differ because of opponents and own team performance, when I first started to play carriers were far better than they are now, hence at the time BB's and heavy cruisers suffered in comparison

I also mainly play battleships and cruisers but use carriers as well. my DD's are appallingly bad so do not use them that often, I am not so much concerned with win rates as with actually getting the requisite experience on the various categories that I am still working towards T10 in US - everything Japan - everything Germany - cruisers and DD's GB - cruisers and DD's currently plus BB's when they are released Russia - Cruisers and DD's currently France - cruisers (need I say more)

I have been slowly grinding my way up the tech tree and have found that if you can keep bows on to the opponent and you are not facing more than 3 ships by yourself, the Dunkerque will do quite well up to T8, Missouri and Iowa are effective against both T9 and T10. Grosser Kurfurst attracts far too much attention from the opponents and thus should only be played in exceptional circumstances, Amagi suffers from distribution of main armament with only 2 turrets forward.

Just some more cross reference and pictures Re KGV and Vanguard including a nice one of them moored alongside each other Except they have not linked

Rule Britainia should be the requisite theme song, followed by Hearts of Oak

The information is taken from the RN research guide in KGV and her history 10 x 14in, 45 cal. Mk VII guns Length of bore: 45 calibres (630in) Length of gun: 52ft 6in breech to face muzzle – 54ft 2.8in overall Weight of gun (bare): 77tons 14 cwt 84lb Weight of gun (with counter-balance): 89tons 2cwt 84lb Weight of breech mechanism: 1ton 17cwt Rifling: polygroove, 72 grooves plain section uniform right-hand twist of one turn in 30 calibres Weight of shell: 1590lb Weight of charge: 338lb Muzzle velocity: 2475 ft/sec Muzzle energy: 67,520 ft/tons Barrel life: 375 rounds Gun mountings: 1x MkII twin gun turret (forward) – 2x MkIII quadruple gun turrets (1 forward, 1 aft) Maximum elevation: 40 degrees Rate of fire: 2 rounds per gun per minute Max rate of gun elevation: 8 degrees per second Max rate of gun training: 2 degrees per second Maximum range: 36,300 yards Shell stowage: 80 rounds per gun (100 max) Read more at http://www.rmg.co.uk/discover/researchers/research-guides/research-guide-b9-royal-navy-hms-king-george-v#c0FdHDqls5QqYUK5.99

I tend to use T6 and T7 Russian cruisers as my flamethrowers

It is nice to see members who actually fight battles making the comments here rather members who just play at fighting battles and churn out reams of comments

Figure for KGV armour comes from Janes Figures for Japanese and German ships come from and article on the web about the Bismarck

Yes, under armoured compared to the German and Japanese battleships of the same period which 19082 and 22895 tons of armour whereas KGV's only had 14000 tons (RN B9 research guide gives a lower figure of 12,413 tons compared to Janes, just found this sight)

The reason KGV is listed as T 7 is probably due to the fact that it was envisaged that US, Germany and Japan would adhere to the Washington Treaty limits, and for the ships to enter service by the due date, the guns had to be ordered, however, subsequesntly the negotiations broke down and thus the KGV's were left under gunned and under armoured

Can we stop slagging each other off and get back to the topic, i.e. the dire state of the royal Navy Battlefleet when there are better designs that were in existence and also the fact that due to the huge quantity of ships, both constructed and designed, the Royal Navy should be split into Battleships (up to 23knts designed speed) this would allow the Royal Soveriegn class to be used in the mainline Fast Battleships (Over 23knts designed speed) This would allow Queen Elizabeth Class to also be used Battlecruisers - this would cover the multitude of battlecruisers to be used as a separate line (no other navy produced an equivalet quantity of this type of ship) Fast raiders (Courageous Glorious and Furius were designed and constructed in this pattern as already stated and would thus give the British Cruiser line some much needed omph (the Germans have Graf Spee) so why not the British having these three ships))