Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'British'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Forum
    • English Speaking Forum
    • Deutschsprachige Community
    • Polska Społeczność
    • Česká a slovenská komunita
    • Communauté francophone
    • Comunità Italiana
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Topluluk
  • Mod Section
    • Rules, Announcements and General Discussion (English)
    • Modding Tutorials, Guides and Tools (English)
    • Interface Mods
    • Visual Mods
    • Sound Mods
    • Modpacks
    • Other Mods and Programs
    • Archive
  • Historical Section


  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL








Found 18 results

  1. Hello! When are the British and German battleships going to arrive in World of Warships! I would like to see both British and German battleships in the game. Such as The Bismarck and The Scharnhorst for the German battleships, and for the British battleships, The Hood and the Prince of Wales, and also King George V. Would be Very Happy and Greatfull for this. So please concider this. With best regards: Medic85.
  2. Hello everyone, as I was playing with my Fuso VI battleship, I noticed that one cruiser and another battleship (both from Japan I believe) were using a flag that remined me of Great Britain. First of all, I would like to ask for the meaning of that British or English flag on a Japanese cruiser, and how can I obtain it too? also, what happens if I use it or not? Is it permanent, or just another consumable like signals? I also have other questions that I would like to ask to the european community, here they go: 1. Since I am a battleship lover, I do in most matches at least 4 to 5 citadel hits, mostly on enemy cruisers and battleships. Although, I have noticed that citadel hits can be easily executed by firing the shell so that it can land on the ship just above the waterline in order to penetrate it in the enemy ship easily. Am I correct? 2. What are ranked battles and team battles? I would like to someone to give me detailed information about those, and the releasing date for both of them. 3. How can I add an existing signature in this forum? I would like to know how does it work. Thanks in advance. TakedaYabu.
  3. British Battleship line WOWS 2017 Predictions at higher tiers. Tier 3-6 wealth of designs to choose from, battlecruisers may also have seperate line up to tier 6 ending with HMS Renown or Tier 7 if Hood is not premium. Tier 7- HMS Rodney. Logical contemporary of Nagato, poor speed, moderate guns and good armour for the tier. Tier 8- HMS KGV. Reasonable fit, problematic in firepower department that could be aided by superchargers or given planned 15” guns although unlikely. Probably compensated with excellent consumables to reflect advanced systems, reasonable speed and well protected even against Bismarck class. Tier 8 Premium/ Tier 9- HMS Vanguard. The last battleship ever launched could work at tier 8/9 once again firepower is somewhat lacking at Tier 9 that makes her more welcome in Tier 8, good speed and reasonable armour at either tier. Tier 9- HMS Lion 1938. Well suited design that holds water in every department despite being lower tonnage than contemporaries at the tier, good speed, reasonable firepower and good protection level. Tier 10- HMS Termarmerie/Thunderer 1942/44. No other battleships beyond Lion were conceived, however numerous iterations were designed throughout the war increasing the protection, secondary firepower and overall displacement by more than 10,000 tonnes. These later designs are difficult to pin down but wargaming have no problem taking liberties with exact specs in favour of a well fitting ship for the tier and this is doable with later lion designs, adequate firepower, good speed and protection once again. Overall theme of higher tier battleships appears to be very good armour protection unlike the British Cruiser line however quality and size of firepower varies wildly. Interested to see what others might predict!
  4. purpletrain0000

    British CV line for 2017?

    Wondering about CV's for the new class lines they are revealing for the Brits in 2017. Most likely BB and DD's tho. Post thoughts.
  5. ABED1984

    HE shells and RN CAs

    What's the point of removing HE shells from the British Cruisers? Is it a balance issue? Or something else?
  6. FullBroadside

    British Cruiser Tech Line Pictures

    Pictures of the British cruiser tech line.
  7. Markemoff

    Royal Navy

    Sorry to mention the Elephant in the room, as I am sure many others have done before me, but why is the Largest Navy of the early 20th century and their biggest rival, i.e. the British Royal Navy and the German Imperial Navy, not represented in this game?? Is it too difficult for you, isn't there enough money in it for you, is the Russian/Soviet Navy more interesting, were the USA and Japan dominant in the First World War? Where are the ships from Germany and UK that fought at Jutland/Skagerrak in the largest Battleship v Battleship fleet action? Please sort this out before I and many others lose patience with you. Regards Markemoff.
  8. Lynexton

    British Carriers (T10 HMS Eagle?)

    NOTE: I am in no position of power, this is just my personal opinion and ideas HMS Eagle was an aircraft carrier in the Royal Navy. She started service in 1951 and ended in 1972. She, alongside her sister ship, the Ark royal was one of the two largest Royal Navy ships to be constructed at the time. She was Audacious class carrier, they were laid down during world war 2 as part of the British naval build-up during that conflict. Two were cancelled at the end of the war. HMS Eagle was the HMS Audacious before she was renamed in 1946 HMS Eagle in my mind, would make the perfect T10 carrier for the eventual British tree that I, alongside others are desperately waiting for in WoWs. This is because the Eagle is somewhat similar to the USS Midway (ish) and I do realise that it was commissioned in 1951 but she was laid down in 1942 before WW2 had ended therefore I do believe it to be relevant. Please feel free to post any thoughts, corrections or ideas in the comments, cheers.
  9. Grand_Moff_Tano

    [CV] How will British Carriers play out?

    Just wondering, but how do you guys think British Carriers will play out when they are eventually released? As I see them being somewhere between Japanese and US Carriers in terms of Squadron size, and having the advantage of having Armoured Flight Decks meaning they have more HP than the other 2 nations. In terms of squadrons I think that they will get 5 planes per bomber and fighter squadrons, with fighters using quite potent cannon armaments in the mid and late tiers compared to the other 2 nations.
  10. HMS_SideSwipe

    New suggestion since release of RN

    Maybe, just maybe a new way of thinking is required.... since the release of the RN cruisers with AP only shells, it got me thinking - What if; Before you go into battle ALL SHIPS had to choose either AP or HE as the ONLY ammo load out they could take - - NO MORE SWITCHING in battle just 1 type selected in port.
  11. Eruantien_Aduialdraug

    Regarding British Destroyers.

    So, I know this is looking a long old way into the future, but what do we make of British DDs? I'm sat here, looking at a spreadsheet I've thrown together to see what we could have, and I'm wondering what WG can, well, salvage. Caution, there will be something of a wall of text inbound. British torps are, in terms of range and speed, not what you could call great (see spoiler below). the overwhelming majority of RN DDs sit between 34 and 36 knots, which is perfectly respectable (outliers being the L-class, at 29, the Admiralty Modified W-class at 32 knots, the O & P-class, S & T-class, and U & V-class, at 36.75 knots, the Weapon-class at 31 knots, and the Daring-class at 30 knots). The actual armaments are, uh, interesting; the L, M, R, and S-classes have three single 102mm guns as the main batteries, two twin 533 mm torps, and a single 40 mm pom-pom AA gun. The V & W-class is complicated... the V-class leader has four single 102 mm guns, two twin 533 mm torps and two pom-poms, the V and W subclasses were the same, but some swapped the pom-poms for a single 76 mm AA gun, then there's the Thornycroft V subclass, which is to all intents and purposes a V class with the 76 and 1 knot faster, the Thornycroft W subclass has a third twin 533 mm torp launcher, the Thornycroft Modified W-class (I said it was complicated!) goes back to two pom-poms, and changes to two triple 533 mm torps, and upguns from 102 mm guns, to 120 mm guns, and finally the Admiralty Modified W-class is the same as the Thornycroft Mod but two knots slower... Sheesh, get your stuff together RN... Aynho, the A-class and B-class (which are later than the V & W-class... Don't worry, it gets more confusing later, with the U & V-class and the W & Z-class) have the same as the Thornycroft Mod, but with quad tubes rather than triples, the C & D-class swaps the pom-poms for a single 76 mm and two quad 12.7 mm machine guns, the E & F trade the C & D's 76 for five single 7.7 mm machine guns. Keeping up so far? Good. So the G & H-class started out, in terms of armament, as a D & D without the 76 mm, but one of the, HMS Glowworm, had pentad tubes rather than quads. And last for single purpose armaments (sort of, more on this later) was the I-class, initially having the same armament as HMS Glowworm, later losing one of the pentad launchers for a 76 mm AA gun and six 20 mm Oerlikons, and by the end of the war landing one of the single 120 mm guns for the return of the second pentad launcher. So... onto ships with dual purpose armaments; Tribal-class (I know, not a letter, weird), as built they had four twin 120 mm HA/LA guns, a single quad pom-pom and two quad 12.7 mm MGs, and a single quad 533 mm torp launcher, later modifications traded one of the twin turrets for two twin and two single Oerlikons. The J, K & N-class splits into two armament wise, the J & K-class having three twin 120 mm dp guns, two pentad launchers, a single quad pom-pom, and two quad 12.7s; the N-class (RNZN) drops one of the torp launchers and the quad 12.7s for a 102 mm AA gun, five twin Oerlikons, and two twin 12.7s. The L & M-class is a little weird, two different main batteries with no apparent designation change; all had a single quad torp launcher, a single 102 mm AA gun, one quad pom-pom and two quad 12.7s, with some ships having three twin 120 mm dp guns, and some having four twin 102 mm dp guns. And now we get to the really strange... the O & P-class... The O-class actually splits into two, the "4.7 inch O-class" and the "4 inch O-class", the 4.7 in O-class had four single 120 mm guns (not dual purpose), a single quad launcher, a single 102 mm AA gun, one quad pom-pom, and six single Oerlikons; the 4 in O-class drops the 120 mm guns and takes an additional three 102 mm AA guns (four in total) and a second quad launcher. The the P-class is the same, but has a fifth 102 mm AA gun. That's right, most of the O & P-class didn't have any guns for ship to ship combat (15 of 20 had no ant ship armament besides torps). I don't know either. Then there's the Q & R-class, which is basically a 4.7 in O that swaps the 102 mm AA gun for a second quad launcher. The S & T-class bring back the 120 mm HA/LA guns, but only four single guns this time, the rest of the armaments are two quad 533 mm launchers, one twin Bofors (yup, Bofors not pom-pom), an eight single Oerlikons. The U & V-class are much the same, but rather than eight single Oerlikons they have two twins and two singles. The W & Z-class quite handily have different armaments for the W and Z-subclasses; both have four twin torp rubes, two single Oerlikons, a single bofors, and a single pom-pom, the W also has a quad pom-pom and the main battery is four single 120 mm dp guns, whilst the Z has a twin bofors and a main battery of four single 113 mm dp guns. Which is a calibre only seen on British DDs. The C-class splits in two due to AA, with the "Ca subclass" (ie, the ones with names beginning "Ca") having four single pom-poms, and the rest having two single pom-poms and two single Oerlikons. All the C-class destroyers have four single 113 mm dp guns, two quad torp tubes, and a single twin bofors. Now we reach the real problem children. So, the Weapon-class... Remember how the O & P-class lacked guns? So the Weapon class has three twin 102 mm AA guns, two twin Bofors, two single bofors, and two pentad launchers. And whereas the O & P could push out to nearly 37 knots, the Weapon is stuck at a crippling 31 knots. Then there's the Battle-class. Which is big... The only DDs that get close to it are the Gearing and the Shimakaze, and it's got nearly 1000 tons more displacement than the Kagero. AA wise the 1942 variant has four twin bofors and six single bofors, whilst the 1943 version had three twin and two single. For torpedoes, it was two quad tubes on the '42 and two pentad tubes on the '43. The main battery... Well, the thing about that is... Ok, so for shooting at ships the '42 has a single twin 113 mm dp turret and a single 102 mm dp gun. The 1943 version changes the 113 for a 133 and the 102 for a 113. So in WoWS it would have a single operable turret, and a single secondary gun... As I said, problem children. Finally we have the Daring-class, which is 400 tons heavier. Do you want to get overtaken by battleships? Then drive the Daring... it tops out at a pathetic 30 knots. But hey, at least we have three twin 113 mm dp turrets with autoloaders, and two pentad launchers. Oh, and it has three twin bofors, which is, you know, useless... Now, I'm sure you can amuse yourselves comparing these armaments to the IJN and USN DDs we already have in game, and the upcoming VFM DDs. But what do you guys reckon WG are going to do with RN DDs, given the sub par torpedoes, and somewhat lackluster armaments, and adequate speed?
  12. Eruantien_Aduialdraug

    Talking about British Cruisers again

    So, last year there was a thread for long range speculation about RN cruisers, rather than commit thread necromancy I thought I'd start a new one. Besides, the state of the game is somewhat different now to what it was then. So, cruisers have been confirmed as the first RN line coming to the game, a curious choice, given the different approach the RN took to cruisers when compared with, particularly, the USN and IJN. Britain, and France, came to the conclusion that the heavy cruiser wasn't worth the costs (naval treaties limiting the combined displacement of ships may have had something to do with this), and instead to primarily focus on light cruisers in the same sort of displacement bracket of heavy cruisers. This leaves us with only 3 actual classes of RN heavy cruiser built. But, I'm sure WG can find some sekrit documents in a Russian bunker somewhere. Personally, I'm more interested in what's going to happen at lower tiers. Several of the earlier British CLs were more like enlarged DDs, similar to the IJN Tenryuu and Kuma classes but a touch slower, and often had pretty meaty AA suites, even when they weren't AA cruisers. Danae (which seem to fit as a tier 4 in terms of overall capabilites) eventually ended up mounting 24 pom-poms, 2 bofors, 12 oerlikons and 2 102 mm AA guns, whilst still mounting double the number of torp tubes that the Phoenix has. But the CLs are something we talked a fair bit about in the last thread, and I'm sure you all have thoughts on them that make more sense than mine. I want to put forwards something a little... different. Ignoring tier 1 for now (I think Active would be a good choice, feel free to shout me down), and assuming tier 5 has the Hawkins as the start of the heavy cruisers proper, can we get ships at tier 2-4 that fill the "brawler" role that early British CLs would struggle at. I think yes, maybe (tier 4's a little, er, optimistic). For tier two let me suggest Eclipse. Aside from having a fantastic name, this protected cruiser managed to make 20 knots during sea trials (predicted 18.5 knots at 8000 ihp and 19.5 at 9600 ihp, but the ships managed to eak out an extra half knot) , making them significantly slower than the competing ships, and like the Chikuma has no belt armour (but does have a good sloping deck of up to 36 mm thicker than the Chikuma's). However, the engines are very well armoured with 152 mm of armour, so whilst you're slow, you should rarely have your propulsion taken out. But let's talk guns. The initial (aka stock) armament was five QF 152 mm guns (capable of 5-7 rpm, the game tends to go for the upper end unless it needs to be changed for balance reasons, but the velocity is a laughable 657 m/s, which would make them some of, if not the, loopiest guns in the game), which is one more gun than the stock Chester and Chikuma, but one less than the Novik and 5 less than the Dresden (but only the Chiku matches the calibre when stock), six QF 120 mm guns (yay secondaries, 6 rpm), and 8 QF 76.2 mm guns (15 rpm, not AA, but the same gun was later modified to be used as an AA piece), and I'll ignore the 47 mm guns for shooting torpedo boats. Those 76 mm guns are actually identical to the secondary guns on the Chikuma, the ships were built at a time when the Anglo-Japanese treaty held strong and there was a lot of cooperation between the two nations when it came to ship building (they paid us, we built ships XD). But that gives a vastly superior secondary armament over the other tier 2 (so what, low tier secondaries suck right? You know you want to.) Anyway, what about upgraded? Well, ditch the 120 mm guns, get an extra 76 mm gun. And an extra six 152 mm guns. That's right eleven 152 mm guns. Basically, what you've got is a lard-arse Chikuma with enough gun to make the Bogatyr blush and Atlanta style ballistics, or an unarmoured St Louis (whichever amuses you more). And potentially troll armour around the engines. So, tier 3. Monmouth. 10 single 152 mm guns (different type to the Elcipse's, same 7 rpm but significantly higher velocity at 846 m/s) and another four of the same guns in twin turrets. That should let you get another 2 guns on target in a broadside than the St Louis, but with slightly lower velocity. But at least you're 1 knot faster than the St Louis, as you can make 23 knots now. Secondary armament is nothing overly special, just ten of those 76 mm guns. In terms of armour, it's basically a St Louis, same 102 mm belt, slightly thinner decks, better turret, barbette and conning tower armour. Really, this armoured cruiser (something of an oddity, as RN armoured cruisers tended to mount a mixed main armament of 9.2 inch and 6 inch guns). Overall it should play pretty much the same as the St Louis and Bogatyr, and we know that they are good ships in the game. Tier 4 is where I'm sort of getting a little hand-wavey. Devonshire. Now, before you either start laughing, or googling then laughing, let me attempt to defend myself and the Devonshires. The secondary armament is six of the same 152 mm guns mounted on the Monmouth and pair of truly atrocious 76 mm guns (483 m/s, wut?), and she can only make 22 knots. But the main armament is four 191 mm guns. Uh. Right, one centerline fore, one centerline aft, and a pair of wing casemates. But it's the armour that does it for me, a waterline belt of 152 mm closed off by transverse bulkheads 127 mm thick, the turrets are 127 mm and the barbettes 152 mm, and then there's the conning tower. 305 mm of armour. Short of BB HE shells, the superstructure is just going to shrug off hits when top tier, and more than likely against most tier 5s too. Unfortunately the deck is the same 19-51 mm as the Monmouth, it's pretty much the only area that didn't get thickened. But whilst it may be slow and not have many guns, those guns can challenge the Myogi's armour, and the armour should protect it against most things. Oh, and it has eighteen 47 mm guns, which is a sizable number, and these same guns were used for AA purposes on other ships until the 2 pdr pom-pom was available in sufficient numbers, so it should have some close AA at least.
  13. Facts and Figures Displacement: 65,000 tons Length: 920ft (280m) Beam: 230ft (70m) Draught: 36ft (11m) Speed: 25+ knots Complement: 682 (up to 1,600 with embarked air group) Propulsion: 2 x Rolls-Royce MT30 gas turbines and 4 x diesel generator sets producing a total of 110MWe Range: 8,000-10,000 nautical miles Armament: Phalanx automated close-in weapons systems,
30mm guns and mini-guns to counter seaborne threats Aircraft: Tailored air group of up to 40 aircraft: F35B Lightning II, plus Merlin and Chinook helicopters Builder: BAE Systems Surface Ships / Thales Group / Babcock Marine Laid down: 7 July 2009 Launched: summer 2014 (planned) Commissioned: early 2017 (planned) Homeport: Portsmouth Motto: Semper Eadem ("Always the Same") Rumours and News 04/11/2013 Britain's two new aircraft carriers are going to cost even more than originally thought, according to the Financial Times. The new price has gone up by an extra £800m. This equates to £3.1bn each, E3.6bn, US$5bn Source - BBC news 22/10/13 Some of the new crew ran from Rosyth dockyard, where the 65,000-tonne warship is over 80% complete, exactly 100 years to the day the only previous bearer of the name was launched. They raised £250 for charity. The previous bearer of the name was a super-dreadnought which served in both world wars. Source - Royal Navy 03/09/13 Current crew complement for the vessel alone is 679 sailors, compared to 3,200 for a Nimitz-class carrier of the U.S. Navy. Harding said such savings were possible through the use of greater automation. He described the weapon-handling system as similar to that found in an “Amazon.com warehouse.” Source - Aviation week References http://www.royalnavy...cts-and-Figures http://en.wikipedia...._Elizabeth_(R08) http://www.aviationw...3_p0-615007.xml http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24801750
  14. purpletrain0000

    British Battleship line for 2017?

    Wondering about BBs for the new class lines they are revealing for the Brits in 2017. Most likely BB and DD's. Post thoughts.
  15. daftapeth

    I will not play this game until...

    In the progression of naval history, it is insulting that the british tech tree and ships have still not been added, eg. HMS Dreadnought, HMS Furious...
  16. Amrumer1000

    Ideas for Premium ships

    Hey lads! In the last weeks I often thought about new Premium vessels WG could add to the game. Just because I think some special ships deserve to be in the game & also because some important ship classes aren't even in the game yet. Of course they could also try to add a 2nd tree but for some nations it will be hard to find enough for 2 trees (some even 1). So I think all Premiums should share some important aspects: 1.They should be different from their "normal" sisters, especially in terms of the gameplay style. Every Premium should be special in their own way. 2. It is definitely nice when ship got an interesting background (history). That would make the Premium way more attractive to collectors. 3. Balance is key. It should still be strong in it's own gameplay style but it should still be worse in some aspects than her "normal" counterpart. What I mean is it really shouldn't be to strong but also of course not to weak. So enough of that. Let's finally begin with my ideas. If you got any ideas as well it's of course appreciated for you to write a comment or suggestion. My first idea was the US Destroyer - USS Pringle [DD-477]. It's a Fletcher-class DD & so obviously Tier 9. I know, I know. Tier 9 Premium... are you mad?! But hear me out. Some time ago they revealed the USS Black [DD-666], which is a Fletcher-class Premium as well. Many suggest it's a reward ship for ranked or team battles. The Black itself seems to be nothing special compared to the "normal" Fletcher from the Stats. It may get a different consumables combo but the only "interesting" thing is that the ship number is 666. When you won so many ranked or team battle seasons I think you earn a special ship that is more different than the "normal" Fletcher. I won't throw the Fletcher-idea away but I chose a more unique one of the class. USS Pringle is such a unique ship. (& I love the name by the way) The USS Pringle was one of the few DD's that got a floatplane catapult mounted on her. But she lost 1 127mm turret, some AA & also 1 of her Torp launchers. That is of course pretty bad & some aspects should get a buff. WG could for example buff the HP from 17,100 to 18,900. Then maybe buff speed & rudder shift a little bit & also give her more concealment. The torps should also get a buff since you only get 1 launcher. (Maybe drop the reload a little bit or give them more speed for less range) Then they could also switch up the consumable combo (Maybe give her Hydro or Radar) You may ask why a floatplane on a destroyer is any useful. First of all it would be something really special since there is nothing like that in the game yet. But it could also be used for stealth fire, when you drop smoke & the plane can spot targets for you. If it's a fighter it will also attack enemy planes. Maybe WG could give the Pringle a special plane. One that gives more range but also attacks enemy aircraft. Since it's a special reward ship she should be very good so people will look forward to unlock her. But of course she shouldn't be overpowered. The USS Pringle also got a quite interesting background story. She did a lot of escort missions but sadly sunk by a kamikaze attack in April 1945. There is even a memorial site: http://www.usspringle.org/ I think it would make a great reward ship for ranked or team battles especially because it's something special.
  17. purpletrain0000

    Thoughts on Tier 6-10 British Cruiser AA

    Post thoughts Ranking of AA with in all the Cruisers? Do you think its decent or excellent at these tiers?
  18. Hello lads! While goofing around in the tech-tree I also checked some premium vessels. I took a look on the Belfast and found something weird. I found out that the Belfast got some seriously op Bofors AA guns. Not in terms of Balance but the Bofors themselves. She doesn't sound like much of an AA boat on the first look. She got 6x2 40mm Bofors & 4x2 102mm with an AA rating of 55. That really surprised me because she got 2 points more than her US Counterpart Cleveland who actually has more AA. Cleveland has besides the 40mm also some 20mm guns + more & higher caliber dual-purpose guns. So I checked the Damage of the British Bofors & found out that they do astonishing 140 damage! That doesn't sound too special I know but the US Bofors only do 68 damage & are also 6x2 40mm. So that's basically more than twice as much as the US ones. In this very moment I got the incredible (boring for you) idea to compare all the Bofors just to find out which are the best! The Bofors guns in the game: Name Nation Caliber Mount AA Range AA Damage AA Damage (if 1x2) Ship examples Bofors Mk1 US 40mm 1x2 3,5km ~11 ~11 Omaha, Cleveland, New Orleans, Baltimore, Flint, Bogue, Midway, Montana, Benson, Fletscher, Gearing,.. Bofors Mk1 SU 40mm 1x2 3,5km ~11 ~11 Murmansk Bofors Mk1 PA 40mm 1x2 3,5km ~11 ~11 Lo Yang Bofors Mk2 US 40mm 1x4 3,5km ~16 ~8 North Carolina, Texas, Iowa, Montana, Saipan, Indianapolis, Ranger, Essex, Midway, Lexington, Colorado,.. Bofors Mk3 US 40mm 1x1 3,5km ~7,5 ~15 New Mexiko Bofors Mk II UK 40mm 1x4 3,5km ~16 ~8 Leander, Fiji Bofors Mk V UK 40mm 1x2 3,5km ~13 ~13 Fiji, Neptune Bofors Mk V RP50 UK 40mm 1x2 3,5km ~23 ~23 Belfast Bofors Mk VI UK 40mm 1x6 3,5km ~29 ~10 Edinburgh Bofors "Chi" Type 98 JPN 40mm 1x2 3,5km ~11 ~11 Taiho, Ibuki, Zao, Hakuryu Bofors wz. 36 PL 40mm 1x2 3,5km ~11 ~11 Blyskawica 50 wz. 34/36 Bofors PL 120mm 1x1/1x2 - - - Blyskawica As you can see the 1x6 Bofors Mk VI does the most damage per mount but the 1x2 Bofors Mk RP50 does more damage than all other Bofors mounts in the game when in 1x2 mount which makes them the best Bofors & one of the best AA guns in the whole game! So in conclusion the British know how to make some incredible good AA. If they would have send the blueprints to the US, they would have probably not lost a single ship in combat against Japanese aviation. Well whatever craphappens & I know it's only a game. When we compare these ~23 Damage "Wunderwaffen" (almost as lethal as the two Atom bombs) they're way better than the crappy German Flakzwilling 30 which only do ~3(!) Damage (Almost 8x better) & the not so crappy German LM/42 which do about ~10 Damage (More than 2x the Damage). They're almost as good as the 76,2mm AA from the Des Moines which do about ~28 Damage per Mount (& have almost double the caliber). & They're actually almost doing the same Damage as the 152mm AA from the Minotaur which do about ~24 Damage per Mount (& are more than 3x the caliber). But now the best part: If we would these British OP Bofors on the Montana instead of the peasant US ones in Dual Mounts we would get staggering 920 Damage from the 40mm alone!! You get the point that these Belfast AA guns are nothing to be laughed about.