Andy_Foulds

Players
  • Content count

    76
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    2959

About Andy_Foulds

Profile Information

Recent Profile Visitors

117 profile views
  1. The regions have separate accounts, but you can use the same email address for all regions. You'll have to register in each region first. I use the same email on EU & NA server accounts. Unifying a user account across regions & between WoT, WoWp & WoWs is meant to be in the works, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting.
  2. Better to have Arethusa as a silver T5 & make Emerald/Enterprise the Premium with Mark IX torpedoes.
  3. The RN T5 DD being balanced against T-22, Minekaze etc seems reasonable, although it will be fodder for the Nicholas & Podvoisky's guns; I suspect the best we can hope for from the BL4.5" guns is 8rpm (please, not a 10sec reload). I'm hoping for Amazon or Ambuscade rather than Venomous - the armament is the same, but I'd rather have the A-prototypes' 37 knots. I too have a suspicion that they might end up as Premiums, I hope we're wrong. I can't see the Anthony or her sisters/close successors at T6 after Gallant, particularly not with a lighter torpedo armament. I could see one of the WEP classes at T7 with the quintuple launchers, Mark IX/IX* torpedoes & preferably a slightly faster per-tube reload, followed by hopefully Jackal at T8 - I still have my doubts about Broadsword/Scorpion. I have no guesses about what's currently in production, only what was stated earlier this year in the Dev diaries. If there's no schedule slippage, there ought to be another RN branch out this year - it's highly improbable that it will be either CV's or CA's, which leaves DD's. Fingers crossed that it's just under wraps or is an early 2018 re-schedule.
  4. The A class could have it's RoF nerfed to fit T5 with her 35 knots restored, it would be better than either Ambuscade or Amazon which have big problems with their guns, the likely torpedoes would be the Mark VII. Placed at T6, they'd need a faster reload per tube with the Mark IX than Gallant, I can't see them having any more gun power although the detectability should be the same 6 km with CE + Camo. This leaves the problem of what to put at T7 with the Gadjah Mada occupying that Tier in the Pan-Asian DD branch; Jackal should be T8, but could be nerfed to fit & restored to full stats for a future branch split, but this depends on what WG do with Gadjah Mada. Don't tease on the T5 torp destroyer, just tell! Unless I missed an announcement in the Dev Diaries. there's no news that else is in production beyond VMF BB's, French BB's, yet more VMF destroyers and another line for the RN (2017 Dev Diaries said TWO new RN lines), the Italians haven't been mentioned (but hopefully their CL/CA branch is on the way). Hopefully the 2nd RN line is the DD branch & close to Trainspite/Mr3awesome's proposals.
  5. It needn't be the Thornycroft R, the Admiralty R isn't that visually different. And the Shakespeare (Thornycroft Leader) doesn't require much alteration to be the Admiralty Leader (Scott). I'd like to see Anthony's model reused for the Tier 5, with Icarus as the Tier 6.
  6. There's also the ex-Radiant (1916 R-class) at Tier 3. I was hoping for the Admiralty V myself... J/K/N at Tier 7 would be interesting, though it would be very easy to make it borderline OP as it really belongs at T8. Hopefully WG aren't going to repeat what it appears they're doing with the BB's & shove the natural T8 to T7 & fill the remaining 3 Tiers with paper or imaginary designs (like L2 given a Lion Design refit, with an optional replacement of the 18" guns with an imaginary 16.5"...) So far (ignoring Campbeltown), we have a T3, a T5, a T6 & a T7, which bodes well for the arrival of the RN DD line soon (fingers crossed for release before the end of 2017).
  7. You're being less than fair to the ships in question with that statement. Hawkins was a WWI design, used to define the upper limits of cruiser tonnage in the Washington Naval Treaty; she's the most likely Tier V & would suffer from poor firepower (her torpedoes were fixed so unlikely to appear in game, although an exception could be made), she's a candidate for some creative fudging of stats (Furutaka had her RoF bumped, for example) & possibly a fictional rebuild similar to the Furutaka 'C' hull. Exeter (York class, which we won't use to avoid confusion with the German Tier VII Heavy Cruiser) was roughly equivalent to the Aoba in armament & armour (although in RL had a higher RoF) but less length/height hence lower detection, so it's the Tier VI candidate. Tier VII would be Kent (https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/64198-royal-navy-tech-tree-proposal/?do=findComment&comment=1628374); the armour is roughly the same as Pensacola (and Yorck, both better than Myoko), the two gun difference is balanced out by Kent having torpedoes (as Yorck - see a pattern?) & Kent should have better concealment to make up for being 1 knot slower. As for Tiers VIII to X, there are multiple completed blueprint designs for British Heavy Cruisers suitable for each tier, depending upon the design year. The most likely Tier VIII is this: https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/56110-a-detailed-look-at-surrey-design-y/. The same Forum Member also has a complete RN tech tree proposal including more than one CA branch. Personally, I'd favour RN CA's, US/IJN CL's, Italian CL/CA & Dutch CL/CA branches. I agree that the Commonwealth cruiser idea is best suited to premiums, although I'd also like to see a Commonwealth CV sometime. (Sorry RCN/RAN/RNZN enthusiasts!)
  8. Sorry about that, it was a late post & I should probably have said 'collect' instead. I mentioned about the Elite XP because the Cyclone & Anthony Captains are the only 19 Pointers I have right now, so the Dunkirk event is an opportunity to get as much Elite XP as I possibly can for use on my other Captains. If you already have other fully trained Captains, then playing with the temporary pair is obviously less important. Congrats on completing the collection.
  9. Either with Free XP or Elite Captain XP; Anthony & Cyclone come with 19 point Captains, so every time you play the scenario (or any other game mode if you transfer them to another ship), you amass Elite Captain XP. I finished the Collection on Wednesday, now I have to figure out what to do with Capt. Dunkirk; maybe buy Belfast & use him as Captain? He has less points than my regular RNCL Captain...
  10. After yesterday's Kraken performance, I didn't expect to better that - then this happened... I'm extremely pleased!
  11. I had noticed the sources (it's online at NavWeapons, after all), but I paid more attention to the part "unlikely that this weapon was ever intended to be used as an actual naval gun", which makes it an experimental weapon that was just attributed to a Naval source (the navy has the biggest guns, didn't you know). H-44 (which was another conjectural study brief from the Schiffsneubaukommission (New Ships Construction Commission), technically part of the Ministry for Armaments & Munitions, not the Construction Office of the OKM that tried very hard to disassociate itself from those incomplete designs) was going to displace 131,000 tonnes, & even that was 'only' intended to mount 2x4 50.8cm guns! The Soviets didn't have any serious plans for guns beyond 456mm either... & they only built a test example of the 406mm. Besides, the Sekretski Sovietski Stalinisverybad Tier X won't need 460mm or higher guns... it'll be armed with 3x4 or 4x3 406/419mm guns with 910mps, 2.25rpm, Stalinium AP & "Rastopite Vas Bystro" HE shells. Shutka na tebe, friends.
  12. Read my lips - NAVAL gun. This was an experimental weapon without any plan to mount it on an actual battleship - floating islands of Napkinwaffe excluded! Roon was based on actual incomplete designs AFAIA. Hindenburg not so much, but the VMF BB line will probably be the most conjectural line yet. Including HSF & the Arpeggio ships! Germany did use triple turrets on it's light cruisers, so it's not totally inconceivable that a later 'Plan Z' vessel wouldn't have had a triple mounting, especially being designed after North Carolina/KGV/Iowa & contemporary with Montana & Yamato. Or that sounds like WG's excuse... beyond 'balance', of course!
  13. Haven't gotten to the Kurfurst yet, but the 42cm guns were paper, obtained by enlarging the bore of the 40.6cm guns on H-39; no larger calibre was ever constructed by Germany. And H-41 was the last completed battleship design of the Kreigsmarine, H-42 onwards didn't get further than preliminary sketches. Using the H-42 dimensions allows WG to slip in the triple turret... yeah, it's a bit of a liberty! If there were no other finished designs available for that Tier in the RN BB branch, I'd have no objection. But both L2 & L3 reached the preliminary blueprint stage before being passed over for G3 & the UK did construct a 457mm naval gun (the US made two prototype guns, only one of which was fired & neither were seriously considered for use on finalised designs). Yammy's 460mm (18.1") guns were the largest naval guns ever constructed, so I can see why WG said enough was enough. L3 would be good, but then so is L2 as the only 4x2 design at that Tier; I'd rather see them worked through than have a new gun calibre that Britain never seriously considered suddenly appear.
  14. Honestly, I would have preferred WG use the L3 (3x3 457mm) design rather than L2, but changing the 4x2 457mm to 4x3 419mm is mixing the L2 with the Lion's supposed upgrade guns. There is no known RN design that uses that main armament layout, so it moves Conqueror from being a 1920's super-battleship as to at least partially a fantasy ship. Give us back our L2 Conqueror; just restore the 4x2 457mm, increase the long-range shell dispersion in small stages until she's better balanced & remove the radar.
  15. Training my 1st IJN DD Captain, struggling to make Isokaze perform properly & getting a little downhearted... & then this happened.