VC381

Hmm... For the US guns those tables match the values in the gun's own page quite closely but for the KGV gun there is a huge difference: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_14-45_mk7.php http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_14-50_mk11.php

Piritskenyer where on Navweaps are you getting those penetration values for the RN 14"/45? I'm seeing much less than that (15" @ 10ky, 11" @ 20ky) but maybe I'm looking at the wrong page. For reference, I'm using: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_14-45_mk7.php

Even if we forget caliber progression, the point raised is very valid since the comparison is to German ships. WG have shown they want lines to have a consistent concept and feel. German BBs have smaller guns than their counterparts but are very tough. KGV is very similar in style to those Germans but is somewhat unique in the RN as most of the time (even when not specifically talking about battlecruisers) the RN leaned towards bigger guns and just "good enough" armor. So she would be an anomaly that played like something from another line.

RN and muzzle velocity never had a great relationship...

As I said, I believe the KGV can and should be T8 but I was trying to demonstrate what you can do if you deliberately argue otherwise. Having said that, until I went to check for my reply I didn't realise how mediocre the guns really were. This is a very big concern if we're talking about something that has to fight Yamatos and GKs. I'm more and more leaning towards the Scharnhorst precedent for these ships. Prince of Wales with early war AA and some nerfing on soft stats, premium T7.

Whoah, this got unnecessarily nasty very quickly. I don't really agree with KGV at T7 and Nelson at T8, but I want to play devil's advocate here. Can I first point out KGVs guns are not "high velocity" by any stretch of the imagination. In fact they are lower velocity than the guns on the New York for an only slightly heavier shell (1590 lb vs 1500 lb for NY). The US ships all get the WWII era shells with the hull upgrades so there is no advantage to KGV from her shells being more "modern" (because they are not). In fact penetration values for KGVs guns are unimpressive to say the least, and lower than the guns on NY. So KGV guns are arguably worse than NY, while still having 10 guns, so basically T5 firepower. Now as far as everything else is concerned, that's another story. The whole ship as a package is very strong in other ways but let's break it down. "Armored monstrosity", OK. 15" belt armor is pretty impressive. You aren't going to get citadels on this bad boy, right? Ultimately, depends on range. The belt is tall and vertical, no turtleback, and the 14" guns available at T5 can probably penetrate it from 10km down. That's broadside of course, but you get the idea. Bow on all bets are off because WG can choose to mess with thickness as they please. She also has an enormous unarmeored superstructure, so fire spammers rejoice. In the short-range brawling fest that this game encourages, Gneisenau is arguably just as tough if not tougher. And she's way too fast for T7. Yeah, right, because that Gneisenau that is arguably just as tanky doesn't go 32 knots... Oh wait. She will murder those T5s that can't out-run her? Kongo wants a word. Anyway speed goes up and down so much from tier to tier, even in the same line sometimes, that it's not a reliable indicator of power. So at least in terms of murdering T5s, we're not talking about a power level outside of what T7s can already do.

Well, the Russian ones have longer range RADAR but you can also see them from the moon and generally they are unlikely to be aggressively pushing and hunting DDs early in the game (because they will get deleted). US ones you have to watch out for due to excellent concealment that is only slightly more than their RADAR range. But, that range isn't all that long. Best thing is to sail in a way that you can turn and run easily. If you see a US cruiser try to stay just on the edge of his RADAR range, that way you know when he turned it on but can vanish in a few seconds by running away. You need to change your tactics a bit with higher tier DDs. Don't just blindly push and smoke. Also be aware of where your BBs are, a cruiser is much less likely to charge you with RADAR if he can see he will eat citadels for his trouble.

I would say, unless you're specifically searching for something optimal for ranked, that the question is missing the point. I don't think ships should be pigeon-holed into specific roles, and if you enjoy your ship and play it well you are an asset to your team no matter what. Yes, you can't usually cap as easily but make up for it in other ways. I did find I enjoyed my Gnevny more in Standard rather than Domination games, because then you can go where you please and your team isn't screaming at you to cap. Having said that, denying a cap is almost as good as taking it, and you can reposition and take an easier cap faster than other DDs. It depends a bit on how your team plays with you but overall I would say it's different without making a judgment on better or worse. Certainly I am not rubbing my hands in glee when I see enemy team full of RU DDs, neither am I overjoyed when they are on mine. I just try to be aware of what they might do differently. You missed another great role BTW, hunting cruisers with AP!

Well, maybe I picked a bad example but even so, in the example I gave that wouldn't happen because the defending team has no reason to leave their own cap. They are outnumbered so they just hold as long as possible, if long enough they win. I never played WoT, what kind of setups do they have for this?

For what it's worth New Orleans these days feels both very slippery (new rudder shift mod) and very tough armor wise (small rework last patch). BBs can aim for turrets all they like but the dispersion will still troll them and a good angle can and will bounce 16" shells. 16" guns are available from T7 and only Yamato has significantly bigger, so the argument that high tier cruisers are facing bigger guns doesn't quite hold given the gun size stops growing as well at about the same tiers (while cruisers get heal as well). I agree playing a high tier cruiser can be tough but I love it. I've noticed that the team whose cruisers get deleted early tends to lose more, I think a lot of people underestimate their presence and potential especially as the game goes on.

15" was a proposal, just as piritskenyer says they were all options drawn up more or less at the same time. At the time the London Naval treaty was in force which reduced the allowed gun size from 16" (as set in the Washington treaty) to 14". The RN started designing to the treaty limits, as did the USN (one design for North Carolina also had 12 x 14" guns in three quad turrets). The London treaty though had an allowance, that said if Japan and Italy don't sign by a certain date, the other countries can go back to building 16" gun ships. The RN of course came up with different proposals for the KGV just in case, at least one of which involved 15" guns. Unfortunately, naval guns take a very long time to design and build. The USN could afford to wait for the deadline to see what happened but the RN could not. So the RN placed the orders within the treaty limits, Japan left the treaty, the USN swapped the North Carolina design to 16" (as allowed) and the RN were stuck with the 14" gun KGV. The choice to go down from 12 guns to 10 was also treaty limited. The stability problems could have been solved by just making the ship bigger but then it would have been above the treaty limit, or they could have kept the 12 guns but reduced armor. In the end they made their choice not to compromise on the treaty or the armor so the guns had to go.

If we're going with "what if" KGV, then the original design with 3x3 15" guns would fit the game's caliber progression even better. The 12 gun sounds more fun though!

Be glad people at T5 haven't figured it out yet and Emerald is quite small. RN cruisers higher up are almost as long as their smoke bubble and rarely pop more than one, two ships in a single smoke bubble is really asking for it. Last time someone tried that on me (Kutozov + Edinburgh division) I watched their shots for a couple of salvos then proceeded to farm invisible citadels. And a few times I tried standing still in smoke with an RN cruiser I got deleted by torp wall and at one point a very savvy CV.

Thanks guys, I need to get back into it I'm not used to slow ships and I'm probably trying too hard thinking it's invincible. I know what the ship can do, just need to keep track of my team and own position better.

Scratch what I said earlier, you can Citadel a Bismarck at 12km, or at least you can in Amagi but Nagato has the same guns just 8 instead of 10.

Vittorio Veneto is T8 material for sure. Cavour and Duilio are weird because stock they are indeed T4 and 5 worth but with their total rebuild they could fill T6 and 7 instead. It might actually work if they had them in the tree twice under different names rather than as different hulls, also would stop people complaining that they lose 3 guns when upgrading the hull. Or one class in WWI fit only at T5 and the other in full rebuild at T7.

Best advice... Wait. USN and Soviet DDs are not what you want. IJN DDs "should" be what you want, but will change soon so we need to see how they will be after that. Also, German DDs recently announced could be interesting for you.

So I came across as a bit whiny, the problem isn't so much that I don't get free silver (much as I would love it). The problems are two: 1) they move the goalposts and pretend it's normal. People expect something because that's how it was before. It's normal to be upset if you don't get something you thought you would, even if in another case it would not be a big deal e.g. if they just said from the beginning this wouldn't happen. 2) WG said specifically the requirements for the missions are set high to increase top tier population. The missions themselves are not extra effort, I don't play with them in mind, but if I want the reward I need to pick certain ships (e.g. ones with long range secondaries). I have quite a few T8 ships and I enjoy playing them, but I don't want to play T8 all the time non-stop (which I would have to because I don't play enough to complete these missions otherwise). So even if silver compensation is a secondary motivation, some people, who don't play those tiers normally, will stop spamming T8+ if the mission reward are seen as less due to that. So WG don't get their goal of more high tier players.

Warspite historical turret traverse - 2 deg/sec New Mexico historical turret traverse - 2 deg/sec So both ships should have a 180 degree turret turn time of 90 sec in game... My point is turret turn times are already massively inaccurate for game balance, otherwise most BBs would be unplayable, so realism is not an excuse in this case. Turret traverse rate was a pretty minor thing IRL unless your target was a plane, in game we have crazy speed/time compression that makes it matter a lot.

Nagato needs to fight at medium range. Angling should work fine as long as you don't get too close. About 15-16km is a sweet spot, you can citadel most BBs at that range, including T8 (yes, Germans too) and some T9 (well, mainly Iowa). If you find a Scharn/Gneis/Bis/Tirp in your face, the trick is either to aim slightly below the main deck (if you caught them broadside) or just below the front turrets if they angle. You can hit 10k-20k salvos on them with just normal pens if they are too close to citadel. Having said that, you should mostly be trying to punish cruisers. You're not super fast, but fast enough to get where you need to be and support your team's push. I know it might be hard to believe if you had a few bad games, but Nagato has the best dispersion at her tier at those ranges I said before. But because you have fewer guns you need to practice aiming more. When you get it right though, cruisers don't know what hit them. If you stay second line they might assume they're safe, and then you start hitting double citadels and farming devastating strike like a boss... I think you should keep practicing. Nagato is a very good ship and once you get used to it, Amagi plays the same way but does everything better. I personally had the opposite experience, I was very frustrated with Fuso but Nagato was a revelation. I think she still holds my all time damage record. I suppose though if you keep trying and you just don't like the style then there is no point torturing yourself, the game has enough variety and other lines. Good luck!

I'm sure in the past when there was a duplicate ARP mission I got the equivalent sale price for a ship I already had (Hiei at the time). I just finished the Ashigara mission, already had the ship from last time, got the new commander but no money. Is this deliberate?

Welp, there goes my dream of using these missions to fund my first T9. Guess I now have little to no incentive to play for them...

Thanks! I don't usually read the announcements section

Well yeah, really no CV would even launch planes if the weather got that bad. The easiest solution is to remove cyclones from CV games...

Incomplete secondary lines is fine. I'm not sure what actual designs exist but I'm sure WG can make up a T10 that looks and feels like a RN BB, would not be much more fiction than GK (OK it's based on the bigger ones in the H design series but I don't recall any design with 4x3 gun layout). What I really hope is, whatever the T10 will be, it gets 18" guns. Now we have two T10s with 12 guns and doing the same again instead of using bigger guns just "because Yamato must be king of gun size" would be very boring. I don't think it would be hard to imagine a scaled up Lion design with 3x3 18". A long time ago in a crappy but addictive game called NavyField (consider it the great-grandfather of WoWs), they made up a top-tier RN battleship called Queen Victoria. I think it really looks the part! BTW, I disagree with N3 or similar 1920s design as T10 because even though the guns and armor are on par with Yamato the speed would be so painful...