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


Forums

  • 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

Calendars

  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Twitter


Location


Interests

Found 44 results

  1. Well first Forum Post lets jump in at the deep end. So the current British Tree is complete with the introduction of the CVs what about doing something like the US Cruiser Split & Japanese DD Split but with the Brits with the BB’s splitting it into a second BB Line also starting at T3. This as the general arrangement of the second BB Line: T3: HMS St. Vincent T4: HMS Neptune (1911) T5: HMS Audacious (1912) T6: HMS Revenge T7: HMS Prince of Wales T8: J3 Design (even though as BC design it is similar to the Hood plus an 18 inch armed BB at T8 seems a bit much although if anyone knows of a better suited second T8 please so say) T9: N3 Design T10: LIII Design Along with this BB Split there is also the possibility of a fully filled new ship type a Battlecruiser Line (this would only really be viable for the UK, Germany as they are really the only two that would befit from it) Please note I will not be including the Hood in this new Line as she sits fine where she is but more to the point by the time she entered service she was essentially a BB only classed a BC in name as she went faster the 30 Knots in fact the Hood was very similarly armed to the QE class with an armour to weight ratio of around 33% compared to the QE classes about 34% also Hoods main belt of 12 inches was only 1 inch thinner than the QE class 13 inch belt, but anyway I digress. The BC Line would look something like this: T3: HMS Invincible T4: HMS Indefatigable T5: HMS Lion (1910) T6: HMS Queen Mary T7: HMS Tiger T8: HMS Renown T9: G3 Design T10: K3 Design Having a second BB Line and a separate BC Line opens up the opportunity to add some great ships into the game that wouldn’t fit as BBs along with the ability of those who have grinded the current line two new ones to grind adding more ships to their port and who doesn’t like more ships. There are also several other ships that could be added but due to already constructed lines these could be added in as Premiums some for Coal/Steel/Free XP. Premiums: T1: N/A T2: Victoria – Pre-Dreadnought Battleship Royal Sovereign (1891) Pre-Dreadnought Battleship T3: Monmouth - Light Cruiser Caroline - Light Cruiser (Last surviving ship from The Battle of Jutland) Inflexible - Battlecruiser T4: Agincourt - Battleship Argus - Aircraft Carrier T5: Erin - Battleship Colossus – Battleship Princess Royal – Battlecruiser Hawkins – Heavy Cruiser Possibly Courageous in her original config – Cruiser Scorpion – Destroyer Suffolk – Heavy Cruiser Barham – Battleship – sister of QE & Warspite T6: No. GB101b Design – Battleship Ajax – Light Cruiser Glorious – Aircraft Carrier Dorsetshire – Heavy Cruiser Savage – Destroyer Norfolk – Heavy Cruiser York – Heavy Cruiser (Exeter’s sister) With Smoke & Spotter Consumable Royal Oak - Battleship T7: Rodney – Battleship – Free XP Ship Dido – Light Cruiser Ark Royal – Aircraft Carrier Howe (planned Admiral Class – Cancelled during construction would have been similar to Hood with some difference) - Battleship Jamaica – Light Cruiser T8: Repulse – Battlecruiser Swiftsure – Light Cruiser Sheffield – Light Cruiser T9: M3 Design – Battleship – Free XP Ship K2 Design – Battlecruiser – Free XP Ship T10: L3 Design – Battleship - Resource Ship I3 Design – Battlecruiser - Resource Ship Malta – Aircraft Carrier – Resource Ship Indeed this is a lot of extra Prems (36) but they would not all be implemented or available at the same time for example the Rodney would be in her configuration when she still had her X-turret Catapult so she would have a fighter/spotter but being the Free XP T7 available when Nelson Isn’t and maybe to counter her fighter/spotter her heal would be reduced. And M3 & K2 being available at separate times one rotated in as one rotated out. Same with the resource ships only having one or two available at a time, and inevitably a few will not be spectacular such as the two T2 BBs but I chose them especially the Victoria history and the fact Victoria is the only vertical wreck, they would probably be similar in play style to the Mikasa but maybe better accuracy. But anyway, these are just my thoughts on ships that I personally would like added in some more than others and chances are not all of them will make it but it is nice to hope, but personally I think the BB split & BC Line would be a logical choice opening more avenues for content and some very historically significant ships. Please do leave feedback and your thoughts in the comments below and let me know anything I may have missed. I’m also currently working on something similar for the US Line (including the addition of USS New Jersey) along with the German, Commonwealth and French Tech Trees.
  2. RNSF (Royal Navy Surface Fleet) We now have the capacity for new members!!! (After culling in-active members) LOOKING FOR PLAYERS WHO WANT TO HELP US PROGRESS IN CLAN WAR'S We are a WOWS clan, made up of primarily English players, & expats but as long as you speak fairly good English, and can take our sense of humour you are welcome (GMT+/-3 time zone is a must) we are shall we say more senior in years. We have assembled a clan of like-minded mature members, who are committed to having a good time, who do not need micromanaging. You will gravitate to players with the same disposition if you are: ⦁ Over 26 (exceptions will be made if you demonstrate maturity beyond your years) ⦁ Not thin skinned (profanity is commonplace) ⦁ A casual player (but not too casual) ⦁ Have a good range of ship tiers & types 7 -10 especially ⦁ Have at least 1500 games under your belt (exceptions made for committed players) ⦁ Enjoy divisioning with like-minded people who can give as good as they get ⦁ Committed to playing the game for mainly fun/relaxation with an eye to competitive play This isn't a clan for you if: ⦁ You require a safe place (if someone calls you a ---- then look inward) ⦁ You are a ship professor i.e players waiting to go into battle while you reel off stats ⦁ You spend more than 20s camo/flagging your ship for battle ⦁ Your mic leaves a lot to be desired i.e others can hear everything that is happening in your household We are a well-rounded bunch who play most day's & evenings clan battles are encouraged but not a prerequisite we operate Discord chat the in-game banter is adult themed so if you cannot stand banter/having the piss taken don't bother. We have a good mix, some play for fun others can get serious we play tiers 4 to 10 with a mix of classes but expect players to rotate types as requested We are looking for players who don't take themselves too seriously, who have a good tier spread of ships and can give as good as they get. DISCORD CHAT CLIENT IS A MUST https://wows-numbers.com/clan/500161631,RNSF-Royal-Navy-Surface-Fleet/ LOOK UP RNSF IN SHIPS CLAN FINDER
  3. Hello Commanders, We are currently looking to expand our clan and would like to hear from you if the following terms apply: - You are over the age of 18+ - Have at least 1 Tier 10 - Have more than 1000 Random Battles (or close to) - You are active on World of Warships - Have TeamSpeak - Are looking to take part in Clan Battles - Have a good sense of Humour - English Speaking Only We currently have a small clan base size where most of our members are from within the UK but we do also have members within the EU from various countries. If you love to play World of Warships and want to have a good bit of fun and up for a laugh then please get in touch, We would love to hear from you!
  4. Die German Ghost Division sucht in WoWS Aktive Kameraden um gemeinsam die Ozeane unsicher zu machen! Uns liegt viel daran zusammen zu fahren und den Gegner in Angst und Schrecken zu versetzen !!WIR suchen Kameraden für Spaß am Spiel!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WIR Rekrutieren wieder! = Was Wir Euch bieten = - Eigener Discord Server - Kameradschaft - Tipps & Tricks = Was Wir verlangen = - Ein T-8er Schiff (nur für Die Leute Pflicht, die bei CW mit fahren möchten) - Aktivität, auch auf Discord (Pflicht) - Du bist 16 Jahre + - Du Besitzt ein Funktionstüchtiges Headset - Vernünftiger und respektvoller Umgang mit den Kameraden - Teamplay & Kommunikation Bei Interesse melde Dich noch heute bei der German Ghost Division per InGame Nachricht bei folgende Ansprechpartnern... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Führungsebene GER_GrimReaper Lord_von_Hafen pepe2005 PrivatPaula ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WIR suchen Dich!
  5. Picturion

    About the HMS furious

    The other day the game brought up a survey about the new CVs, but I had only played the hermes, so I had no idea what feedback to give, considering that all T4 CV play is awful (but that is to be expected) So now that I am informed I can give some specific opinions that I should have given in that survey. The good Health and surface detectability are fine. Plane HP is good enough and AA firepower is as good as it is necessary in its tier. Torps are slow but powerful and rockets are not very hard hitting but accurate. The Bad Those cluster bombs. I cannot even describe how frustrating and unreliable they are. They scatter all over the place, hitting everywhere but the target area (I swear that sometimes they land outside of it). I would say that to be different from the other nations they should be accurate, but not very powerful. Even the gigantic dispersion circle of the ranger's divebombers gets better results. Everytime from the ranger or ryujo to the furious I feel I'm getting a hand tied to my back, like every type of squadron I have matters and has a purpose. Air surface detectability; not fatal, but even the ranger has better concealment from air Again, this is the opinion of someone who never plays beyond T7 (I just don't like the higher tier gameplay and the endless overtiering in T8), so I don't know how all of what I've said applies to further ships down the line.
  6. Not having much luck with this ship. Same guns as Hood and Warspite. I feel I do well in Warspite, or at least enjoy it. But Vanguard? I've heard its good at bow tanking? If anybody has it, and does well in it, I'd be grateful to have a few pointers.
  7. Evil0wn3r

    Premium CV i brytyjskie cv

    Przechodząc od razu do rzeczy: Czy lotnie premium pojawia się jeszcze w sklepie? Czy mi się tylko wydaje czy brytyjskie lotniskowce dostały solidnego nerfa na rakiety i bomby? Tier 6 furious zadanie obrażeń bombami no powodzenia (zredukowanie klucza atakującego z 2 samolotów do 1) Samoloty atakujące również Furious no obrażenia bardziej losowe niż cyfry do lotka a czas ataku taki sobie Tier 8 jako tako póki co. Co o tym myślicie kapitanowie?
  8. AirSupremacy

    British CV`s - Im soooo excited !

    What are your thinkings about the British CV(s) presentation ? The 0.8.1 update thread is still locked, Im very much looking forward to play the British CV`s :-) How do you think it will affect your gameplay or the gameplay in general ? Its sooooooooo exciting ! I find it great that the game is getting more Warthunder feeling and becoming a full Theatre of War game. Enjoy WoWs, pewpew !!!
  9. StoryBrit

    British Carriers

    Why are there no British Aircraft carriers? in world war two only the USA had more carriers than the British. The British Navy was the worlds largest navy as that time
  10. My idea of Prince of wales is to make it the first bb in the game to carry a smoke screen IF it ever gets added, this can be/is a reference to the battle of the denmark strait when it had to lay one to escape the bismarck. the stats will be the same, like artillery or aa. Maybe its unique perm camo can be the welsh flag, after its namesake. The tier, speed and maximum ap/he can be the same since there is already 2 kgv ships in the game. Who thinks this concept sounds ok?
  11. So looking over the WW2 destroyers modeled in WOWS I notice that they don't seem to have any obvious enclosed bridges, just the external navigation bridge. Looking at destroyers for other nations they have obvious enclosed bridges with lots windows, whereas the British destroyers seem to have just a couple of portals where windows would be. So I'm wondering did a lot of British destroyers in WW2 not have enclosed bridges or are they in there just limited to a few portals??
  12. When do you guys think Royal Navy BB's are going to be added to the live server? No mention in 0.6.8 patch notes.
  13. IJN_Kitakami

    Scenario for French and British

    So we got 4 scenarios with each scenario rewards a different nation commander. Japan,USA,Russia and German. Only 2 nation (French and British) dont have reward commander scenarios. So will new scenarios added for these nation? Also possible scenarios for Italians too? Thanks
  14. Kolbrand

    New boats British/Norwegian MTBs

    Hi and thank you for a great game, I see that you have used a few houses to populate your villages from my home town on some of the maps :) So I thought I would suggest a new boat for the destroyer class (maybe). When I was young, these boats used to show up in the harbor from time to time. They were already old then and are scrap now, but I think maybe they could have a place in the game and could be fun to play. Norway did not have too many big naval boats, but through the years we have had some fine MTBs. Motor torpedo boats that were suppose to work out of the fjords. Show up, hit hard and run (I think). Others will know much more about the tactics. The boats were small, fast and had forward pointing torpedoes. Like a big speed boat. Think some of them could do 50 knots. And maybe they will have to in this game to stand out and play a different role. The Norwegian boats were British/Norwegian in the beginning and later all Norwegian design. Today Norway still retains a MTB (Corvette) weapon with the hyper modern anti radar "hovercraft" Skjold class at 60 knots. Maybe this is an old request and voted down, but it could be fun. While we are waiting for subs and the ability to lay mines :) Great game, Paul Some youtube links to MTB boats
  15. 'lo all. This is my first time on the forums, but as a regular WoWS player, I'm one of the many who would like to see HMS Vanguard introduced into the game. I know this discussion has been recycled, a lot, but I haven't seen any really detailed threads. Maybe there are and I've just missed them! People want Vanguard. The problem is balancing it. She was the last and most modern battleship, ever built, so she has to be of a relatively high tier. The game already has four Tier 7 Royal Navy "battleships" (air quotes for Hood), so T7 is oversaturated. Her 8x 15" guns sound fine on T6, but there's no way Vanguard should be down in T6, she's way too modern and was the successor to the T7 KGV class! So... T8 is the best fit, but balancing an eight-gunned 15" battleship at Tier 8, save from turning her into a Bismarck clone, would be challenging. I've been thinking on this and have a few ideas. I would like to hear what other people have to say and give their input. What is needed, I believe, is to make the under-gunned Vanguard feel modern. I'm not talking about skipping around at high speed, avoiding any kind of detection, twirling around her clunky opponents, all while laughing and flicking the two-fingered salute... no, I'm talking about a ship that feels unique and enjoyable to play, offers a little something different, is free from any game-breaking buffs and is strong and competitve, without ruining the enjoyment for the opposing team. I believe this ship can be made viable, while maintaining historical accuracy (which is something that matters to me), with every characteristic being based off of real world stats (as much as possible, at least!). I'll be quoting a lot from Wikipedia. ARMAMENT -Primary Battery Eight (4x twin) BL 15" Mk1 guns. Same as Warspite & Hood. This is the first hurdle: Warspite is to be feared in T6 matches and respected when fighting T8's. However, as a T8, Vanguard will have to face T10's... with eight 15" guns (!!). Big problem. What usually happens, in this scenario, is the ship is given an artificially-increased reload speed, to compensate for smaller guns, or lack of, or both (25s for Monarch, 26s for Bismarck & Tirpitz, 28s for Gascogne). It would be easy to slap a 25s reload on Vanguard and hope... but, please, don't!! Stick with the historically accurate 30s! A rate of fire buff is not required, to make this ship competitive. No, seriously, hear me out... The guns are small, for a Tier 8, yes. They are few, for a Tier 8, yes. They don't have a special reload, yes. So her shells don't do a lot of individual damage, she has a relatively small broadside and she doesn't fire that quickly. However... The guns in Vanguard were modernised, to the Mk I(N) RP12 design (more range). She could also utilise supercharges, increasing muzzle velocity, penetration and range. My idea would be to implement Vanguard into the game, so that her main guns are always using supercharges. If implemented properly, this would make Vanguard's guns competitive, despite the reduced number, smaller size and standard reload. An added benefit, is the people at WG could make the firing animation and sound of Vanguard's guns SPECTACULAR, owing to the supercharges! Imagine... a huge, thundering crack, an enormous muzzle-flash and an almighty spit of flame! She would have a badass reputation, from that, alone! Stats are as follows: Firing range- 30.68km (34.63km with supercharges). Now, obviously WoWs doesn't deal with actual ranges, more effective ranges (Warspite hit Giulio Cesare at 24.1km, but her in-game range is only 16.3km, for example), but it would be reasonable to give Vanguard an in-game range of around 20km, give-or-take. Muzzle Velocity- 749m/s (nothing confirmed for supercharges). This isn't enough. Luckily, if we follow the "Vanguard with supercharges" logic, we can boost that. I've seen quoted figues of over 850m/s, but let's say, for the sake of gameplay/balance, that Vanguard's guns have a velocity of around 920m/s. Let's also say, for the sake of balance, that her shells maintain good momentum, with low drag and good arcs (the shells fired are more modern than those of Warspite/Hood). This would give her 15" shells strong punching power. So another string to her bow would be increased penetration and normilisation angles. Krupp value would need to be increased, to make this work properly. "Ahh, but Roma has 15" guns and very good penetration, but suffers from over-pens on cruisers and bounces on battleships"... yes, but carrying-on the WoWs tradition that most British ships have fast-arming fuses on their AP shells, we give Vanguard the same 0.01s fuse times as the rest of the Royal Navy fleet (or similar, anyway). The fast fuses will ensure consistant penetrations -with less over-penetrations-, on cruisers... whereas the fast shells, with good normalisation angles would allow the shells to penetrate Battleship armour, before exploding, ensuring consistant penetrations and less bounces. This would mean that Vanguard would not be a long-range HE spammer and could reliably fire AP at battleships, at medium and long ranges. Obviously, they are still only 15" shells, so proper battleship & heavy cruiser angling & bow-tanking would defeat them, requiring a switch to HE. Proposed AP stats: Around 12k, extremely fast, enhanced normalisation, short fuse. Proposed HE stats: The same as Monarch would be fine. Vanguard has 1 less gun (broadside) and 2 less guns (bow-on), with less DPM, so she wouldn't be the devil fire-starter that opponents hate! Now, this is important: These guns have to be accurate. No, not accurate, but ACCURATE. I would propose WG make Vanguard the most accurate battleship in the game, with brilliant (for a battleship, we're not talking cruiser, here) horizontal & vertical dispersion and a sigma rating of 2.1. Yes, 2.1. Bearing in mind, this is not only an under-gunned battleship, but also THE MOST MODERN battleship, in the world, with extrordinarily advanced fire control systems: "Vanguard was unique among British battleships in having remote power control (RPC) for her main, secondary and tertiary guns along with the Admiralty Fire Control Table Mk X for surface fire control of the main armament. There were two director control towers (DCT) for the 15-inch guns, each carrying a "double cheese" Type 274 fire-control radar for range finding and spotting the fall of shot." " When the 15-inch gun turrets were modernised, their existing 15-foot (4.6 m) rangefinders were replaced by 30-foot (9.1 m) ones in all turrets except for 'A' and they were fitted for RPC in azimuth only. The turrets were also provided with de-humidifying equipment and insulation to improve their habitability." There is arguement here, to make Vanguard so accurate. Both with historical facts and gameplay balance in-mind. She can't throw as many -nor the biggest- shells down-range, so she needs to make each attack count. She could also be blessed with comfortable gunnery; fast (ish) rotating turrets, which would lend themselves to the more modern feel. Wherever you aim, these shells go! -In short, Vanguard's guns would provide less damage output per-shot, a weaker broadside, an ordinary reload and poor DPM... compared with those of almost all her rivals. But she would compensate, by having hard-hitting, deep-biting, reliable AP penetration and strong, dependable HE shells, both with high projectile speed, good arcs, shorter lead-times and monster accuracy. -Secondary Battery "The secondary armament consisted of sixteen 50-calibre QF 5.25-inch Mk I* dual-purpose guns in eight twin gun mounts. They had a maximum depression of −5° and a maximum elevation of 70°. They fired an 80-pound (36.3 kg) high-explosive shell at a muzzle velocity of 2,672 ft/s (814 m/s). The improved 5.25 turrets on Vanguard were claimed to be fully automatic, with a power-rammed breech and automatic tracking and elevation under radar control enabling a rate of fire of about 18 rounds per minute." OK, so 16 (8x twin) 5.25" rapid-firing secondaries. Not particularly impressive. Good for lightning fires, maybe. Give it a range of around 5km, give-or-take? The automatic tracking and elevation under radar control is interesting, make these the most accurate (if, somewhat weak) secondaries in the game. Dual purpose, also good for AA. Nice and modern! -AA "Short-range air defence was provided by 73 Bofors 40 mm AA guns in a variety of mountings. Vanguard had ten sextuple-barrel power-operated mounts concentrated in the superstructure and stern, a twin-barrel mount on 'B' turret, and 11 power-operated single mounts on the upper deck and rear superstructure. All mounts could depress to −10° and elevate to a maximum of +90°. The 40-millimetre (1.6 in) gun fired a 1.97-pound (0.89 kg) shell at a muzzle velocity of 2,890 ft/s (880 m/s) to a distance of 10,750 yards (9,830 m). The gun's rate of fire was approximately 120 rounds per minute." Pretty monstrous! In addition to the dual purpose secondaries, you have 10x sextuple (that's 60), 1x twin, 11x single 40mm Bofors AA guns! The AA rating on this thing should be pretty high and be very, very good for short-ranged defence. Not so much use for supporting teammates, however. SPEED AND MANEUVERABILITY She has the speed. She was designed to have 130,000shp and reach 30kn, but during trials, she achieved over 136,000shp and reached 31.57kn. In-game, I think the 136,000shp should be quoted, with a speed of 31.5kn. That's fair and would make her a very speedy (but not overly-so) battleship, able to respond to threats and push forward, into position... be the VANGUARD, so to speak! As for maneuverability... well, she's a large vessel (248.2m, or 814ft 4 inch). Almost 50 feet longer than KGV! So this would translate to a large turning circle. KGV's turning circle is 790m, so Vanguard's would have to realistically be nearer 810m, or something. However, due to complaints of the KGV class having poor seaworthiness: "The King George V-class ships had been built with almost no sheer to the main deck forwards to allow 'A' turret to fire straight forward at zero elevation, resulting in a poor sea boat that took a lot of water over the bow. Vanguard was redesigned as a result of this experience, significant sheer and flare being added to the bow. The ship was well regarded as seaworthy, able to keep an even keel in rough seas." This could realistically translate to a ship with a relatively quick rudder-shift time, that answers her rudder quickly (OK, the above has nothing to do with rudder, but we have little to play with, when talking about HANDLING in-game) and maintain good speed in a turn. Again, this will feel MODERN. ARMOUR AND HEALTH As you can see from the above photo, Vanguard is very similar to KGV. In-fact, the armour scheme was based on that of KGV. In-game, that could translate to having almost identical armour and health as Monarch, only slightly better. As wikipedia shall explain: "The ship's armour scheme was based on that of the King George V class with a thinner waterline belt and additional splinter protection. Originally the belt armour was equal to that of the older ships, but it had to be reduced to offset weight increases when the design was modified to reflect wartime experience. The waterline 460-foot (140.2 m) main belt was composed of Krupp cemented armour (KCA) 13 inches (330 mm) thick, but increased to 14 inches (356 mm) abreast the magazines. It was 24 feet (7.3 m) high and tapered to a thickness of 4.5 inches (114 mm) at the bottom edge of the belt. Fore and aft of the 12-inch (305 mm) transverse bulkheads that closed off the central citadel, the belt continued almost to the ends of the ship. Forward it tapered to a thickness of 2 inches (51 mm) and a height of 8 feet (2.4 m) and aft to the same thickness, but a height of 11 feet (3.4 m). At the aft end of the steering gear compartment was a 4-inch (102 mm) transverse bulkhead. After the Battle of the Denmark Strait in 1941, 1.5-inch (38 mm) non-cemented armour bulkheads were added on the sides of the magazines, to protect them from splinters from any hits from plunging shells that might have penetrated the ship's side beneath her belt. When the gun turrets from the First World War-era battlecruisers were modernised, their KCA faceplates were replaced by new ones 13 inches thick, and their roofs were replaced by 6-inch (152 mm) non-cemented armour plates. Their sides remained 7–9 inches (180–230 mm) in thickness. The barbettes for the 15-inch guns were 13 inches thick on the sides, but tapered to 11–12 inches (279–305 mm) closer to the centreline of the ship. The side and roof armour of the 5.25-inch turrets was 2.5 inches (64 mm) thick. Their ammunition hoists were protected by armour 2–6 inches (51–152 mm) thick. Intended to resist the impact of a 1,000-pound (450 kg) armour-piercing bomb dropped from a height of 14,000 feet (4,300 m), Vanguard's deck protection was identical to that of the King George V class. It consisted of six-inch non-cemented armour over the magazines that reduced to 5 inches (127 mm) over the machinery spaces. The armour continued forward and aft of the citadel at the lower-deck level. Forward it tapered in steps from five inches down to 2.5 inches near the bow. Aft, it protected the steering gear and propeller shafts with 4.5 inches of armour before tapering to a thickness of 2.5 inches near the stern. Unlike the Germans, French and Americans, the British no longer believed that heavy armour for the conning tower served any real purpose given that the chance of hitting it was very small; Vanguard's conning tower was therefore protected with 3 inches (76 mm) of armour on the face and 2.5 inches on the sides and rear. The secondary conning tower aft had 2 inches (51 mm) of armour on its sides. Vanguard's underwater protection was enhanced when she was redesigned in 1942 to reflect the lessons learned when Prince of Wales was sunk by Japanese torpedo bombers. It still consisted of a three-layer system of voids and liquid-filled compartments meant to absorb the energy of an underwater explosion. It was bounded on the inside by the 1.75–1.5-inch (44–38 mm) torpedo bulkhead. Her enlarged oil tanks reduced the empty spaces that could flood and cause the ship to list and greater provision was made to pump these spaces out. The longitudinal bulkheads of the side protection system were raised one deck higher to further subdivide the spaces behind the waterline armour belt. The side protection system had a maximum depth of 15 feet (4.6 m), but this decreased significantly as the ship narrowed at its ends. Over the length of the citadel, this system was found to be proof against 1,000 pounds (450 kg) of TNT during full-scale trials." So, a slightly reduced armour belt is the only are that Vanguard would lack, compared to KGV & Monarch. Her increased splinter-protection could translate to extra protection against HE shells and she also has seriously good torpedo protection. More on that: "Vanguard's design was revised again, while the ship was under construction in 1942, to reflect lessons learned from the loss of the King George V-class battleship Prince of Wales and operations with the other battleships. The space between the inboard and outboard propeller shafts was increased from 33.5 to 51.5 feet (10.2 to 15.7 m) to prevent a single torpedo from wrecking both shafts, and watertight access trunks were added to all spaces below the deep waterline to prevent progressive flooding through open watertight doors and hatches as happened to Prince of Wales." This could be reflected in higher torpdedo-damage-reduction, than her contemporaries, which would help, given her large turning circle. It would also make sense if she suffered flooding for a shorter period of time. As the "crew" on your WoWS battleship sealed the various compartments, this shorter flooding time would reflect the thought and design that went into the ship. She also had a double-bottom arrangement (two "skins") and was "divided into 27 main compartments, with water-tight bulkheads". Overall, her armour would be tougher than Monarch, with better torpedo defence and increased damage recovery. She would also have more health. However, she might be slightly more susceptible to citadel damage. CONCEALMENT AND STEALTH OK, she's a big, long, wide ship. However, she does have quite a sleek side-profile/silhouette and looks quite sleek, overall. See below: I would be tempted to reflect this with pretty good surface detectibility. Not Monarch, nor Roma stealth, but better than average. Overall, pretty sneaky, but won't surprise any cruisers. I would also reflect the enormous length and width with pretty average-to-poor air detectibility. Planes will see this thing from above, it's not a Yamato or Grosser Kurfurst, but it's no light cruiser! EXTRAS Now, if... BIG IF... she still wasn't quite up to snuff, there is one other thing I thought of... I don't believe it is necessary, but I'd like to know what people think: Now, obviously, almost all WW2 battleships had radar... WAIT! WAIT! LET ME FINISH!... and Vanguard's would be the best of them... I SAID LET ME FINISH!!... The thing is, I am not a fan of radar in WoWS, certainly not on a battleship (or Belfast) and I know most people feel the same. However, this super modern battleship, last of its kind, does feel a bit blind, with no spotter plane and no hydro. Add hydro, if you want, standard hydro isn't that powerful on a battleship. What if they gave Vanguard a completely unique form of radar, where it is a pulse, or a PING... extremely long ranged, the entire map, even... but it only highlighted every enemy ship for 1 second?? Like the radar gadget thing on Aliens Vs Predator! Or like a real sonar pulse. PING!... every enemy ship is spotted for one second... and they're gone again. This would not allow anyone to fire upon the enemy, there is just no time, but it would allow the fleet to know roughly where the enemies are (I say "roughly", as there's no way the enemy ships would maintain position). It would only have maybe 3 charges and would CERTAINLY not break the game! No-one would get shot, as a result... but it would give a brief glimpse into the enemy's plans. I can see this being quite uselful in clan battles, but not a deciding factor. Basically, that's my idea on Vanguard, it's taken me a LOOOONG time to type this up, but I am keen to know what others think. Thanks for reading (those who have). I'll leave a brief summary: VANGUARD Tier 8 Pros: -Fast battleship -Good armour scheme with additional torpedo & flooding protection -Good AA protection -Comfortable gun handling -Maintains speed in a turn -EXTREMELY accurate guns (for a battleship), with supercharges -Very fast shells, with short lead-times and good arcs -Very good AP penetration, with enhanced normalisation & krupp rating -Good, dependable HE shells, with good damage and fire chance -Pretty good concealment from sea -(possible unique radar pulse) Cons: -Small guns for tier, no overmatch -Normal reload and only 8 guns; gives poor DPM -Lower damage per AP shell, than most rivals -Smaller broadside than most rivals -Pretty lacklustre secondary armament -Large turning circle -Pretty poor concealment from air -No spotter plane Overall, I think this would be a fine ship. Dependable, fun to play, does a good job at maintaining historical accuracy, but still allows for game balance. I think the modern "flavour" would shine through, giving an entirely unique -but still quintessentially Battleship- form of gameplay. It would also NOT ruin the fun for the enemy team, nor would it be any better than the non-premium tech tree ships, which I think is extremely important. Thanks, everyone.
  16. RNHF (Royal Navy Home Fleet) We are a WOWS clan made up of British players (GMT time zone is a must) who are shall we say more senior in years 28+ we are a well-rounded bunch who play Tue,Fri,Sun evenings 7.30 for 8 pm we operate Curse/Twitch chat the in-game banter is adult themed so if you cannot stand having the piss taken don't bother we have a good mix of southerners & northerners and 1 welsh (no sheep shaggin jokes) We play tiers 4 and up with a mix of classes but expect players to rotate types as requested LOOK UP RNHF IN SHIPS CLAN FINDER
  17. My proposal for a tier V British Premium, the HMS Canada.-Who is the HMS Canada? The HMS Canada served in the British Royal Navy from September of 1915 until 1920 when she was re-purchased by the Chile Navy. She was laid down in 1911, and was Launched in November of 1914 under the name of Almirante Latorre and served for Chile for just 9 monthes before being re-purchased and re-named to HMS Canada by the Royal Navy with the break out of WWI. After she was in service with the Royal Navy, she was slightly modified for British usage, including the bridge being taken off in favor of two open platforms, and a mast was added in between the two funnels to support a derrick that would service launches of sea planes. She Initially served as part of the 4rth squadron of the Grand Fleet, and first saw action in the battle of Jutland, suffering no damage.She was then in 1916 transferred to the 1st battle squadron, and upgraded with better range finders, and 2 of her aft secondary 6 inch guns were removed as they were damaged from the middle 14 inch turret firing. Later on she received another refit to add additional launch platforms on top of the super firing turrets both on the front and aft of the ship.She was moved into the reserve of Royal navy ships in March of 1919, where she would wait for 13 monthes until being re-purchased by Chile in April 1920, where she was re-named to Almirante Latorre yet again. -She is one of a kind, Seriously! The HMS Canada is one of 2 Almirante Latorre class Super-Dreadnoughts ordered by Chile, however, the 2nd ship of the class, the Almirante Cochrane was never completed. Laid down in 1913, with construction continuing until 1918 when Britain re-purchased the ship, and started converting her into an aircraft carrier, completed in 1924, under the new name of the HMS Eagle. The HMS Eagle served in the Royal Navy for 18 years until she was sunk by U-Boat 73 in the battle of Malta. No other orders for Almirante Latorre class ships were ever ordered or built, making the HMS Canada absolutely unique. To this day a few parts of the HMS Canada still exist, as parts for the IJN Mikasa, (now to this day a museum ship) which were fitted on for her restoration after Japan bought the HMS Canada from Chile for scrap in 1959. Why bring her into World of Warships? -She has some unique aspects to her. Comparatively to other ships currently in the game, she probably like a new york class battleship in main armament, with more beefy but less in quantity secondary armaments. In the regard of fanbase, you would be hitting 2 birds with one stone, British and Canadian players. In regards to the economics of her as a premium ship, she would do well to, well, satisfying the entire Canadian player base such as myself, especially given Canadian designed ships are few in number and would otherwise not be introduced for a long time, possibly not for years after WoWS goes live. To differentiate her from the Warspite for British ship fans, if she is placed at a different tier then the Warspite, she could be a cheaper option. To super strong British fans, who would want to train their British commanders faster, having a second British ship to put them on would be useful further bringing an the appeal. Furthermore, given her more aggressive gun layout, she may be a more attractive option for gameplay prospect/playstyle, where as the Warspite is more attractive to the history buff fans.Gameplay Statistics: -Tier V PremiumArmament:-10 x 14inch main guns -16 x 152mm scondary guns (Unless we go to the modified variant of the ship which only has 14) -2 x 3 in (76 mm) anti-aircraft guns -4 x 3-pounder guns (Dual Purpose?)-4 Submerged Torpedo 21inch (533mm) tubes (If that gameplay element is ever added)My assessment on the armament is she would be on par with the new york, able to be aggressive, good armament for close range DDs, but susceptible to planes/aircraft. Her main guns could reach a max range of 33km, given WoWS uses effective firing ranges as max ranges, I'd estimate they'd be about 18km. Maneuverability -22 Knots max speed -other in game characteristics unknown My assessment/guess, based on the diagram showing she has 1 rudder and 4 propellers, she is likely the opposite to the Warspite in that the Canada would have good acceleration but slow/large turning radius.Armor: -250 mm (Barbettes and Turrets) -230mm (Belt) -280mm (Conning Tower)-38mm (Deck)Assessment, She is less armored then the new york of the same tier, but better consistent armor then the Kongo Final Assessment on her potential Gameplay:-She feels different then other ships around her in my suggested tier. Her Gameplay would be unique, comparatively to what is in the game currently (patch 0.3.1). I feel she would be good in just an outright slug fest, could hold her own against her main rivals, the Kongo and the New York, as tier 5 battleships are concerned. Her drawbacks being slow and poor AA, her strengths being main and secondary armaments, as well as possibly good acceleration. Her Gameplay is unique, different from the Warspite, and probably alot of fun, and a good chance to appease the canadian player base (even though this ships association to Canada is its name only), as that would otherwise be a long off goal, making us canadians such as myself sad, as we did have the one of the largest navies in WWII. Hope you enjoyed the read, took me a couple of hours to write this (I run a duplicate article on NA)~Just a Canadian player in a game of war.
  18. SweneyB

    bad teams

    Hi there i am sweney and id like to talk about the terrible status off most off the teams in this game. First off i am not the best i don't even come close to it but i do my best when it comes to assessing a situation and help out where i can when i can with my ships i go from cap to cap. I have been frustrated with the lack off tactical game play ''the what should i do once i cap a base?'' or ''where should i go?''. I have seen some bad teams lately and this has me worried. Teams are passive and inexperienced, team play is not rewarded, smart play is not rewarded. you still see BB's and cruisers a like camping in the back off their max range and shoot in smoke. Even after the new update they have no real threat unless you come really close with the threat to get torpedoed or team focused to death, this has to be tweaked more as the British are still a OP pain in the but both cruiser and BB line. I had a situation that i was playing with my .Fredric de grobe. and the enemy was on bravo with several dd's with cruisers on their back and the BB's on theirs. My cruisers openly admitted in chat they did not want to go in because they where afraid off dying. I had to push bravo kill the enemy my self taking heavy damage i went to A and i was there alone facing 3 enemy BB's with my team still camping afraid in front off Bravo cap. I called for backup and got zero respond and i died and got reported lost some karma points that mean absolutely nothing. And this happens a lot, entire teams go to one side off the playground more worried about their health bar than the objective at hand ignoring it completely. The players that try to play the objectives are ignored and abandoned to die. These kinds off situations are increasing, the more players that join the game the lower the quality off the player base. The players that do play smart cant always carry their teams because this is a multiplayer game, good players lose multiple battles in a row and leave the game out off frustration. Please Wargaming give your community a good look they need to be helped and improved. Please try and make objective game play more reward able and teach the new players on how to perhaps play like this. There are plenty off streamers and youtubers like Notser that can explain to you how to play your objective i watch him i recommend MrNotser on youtube. I wish you all a great day
  19. Maximilian_Graf_von_Spee

    King George V is tier 8 (with screenshot)

    SO was taking the Big E for her maiden voyage and this happend. So Nelson might be tier 7 after all? Stats seem decent enough though.
  20. T40_95

    British Aircraft Carriers?

    At the moment there are only two countries that have a carrrier line. Britain isn’t one of them. surely because Britain built the first carrier (HMS Furious, the 457mm gun ship), British lines should have the carriers? Personally I would like to see British carriers before June ‘18
  21. Flukeyluke

    Warspite

    i personly still think the warspite is the best ship in the game tier for tier, it just never gets old
  22. I've got a couple of the British DDs, Icarus, Acasta etc. What happens to the ship, ship XP at the end of the RN DD event? thanks in advance
  23. ID_79

    HMS Belfast - eure Eindrücke

    Moin, heute ist mein absolutes lieblings Schiff nach langem Warten endlich rausgekommen *_* . Leider bin ich derzeit etwas skeptisch: sie verliert unheimlich schnell an HP. Eine Salve von ner Tirpitz oder Scharnhorst reicht aus, damit sich die Belfast den Meeresgrund anschauen kann. Was haltet ihr von diesem majestätischem Schiff? Gruß ID_79 PS: Ich suche einen maritimen Clan also könnt ihr mich gerne anschreiben ;)
  24. HMS_Birmingham_C19

    Royal Navy Destroyers

    Do we have any idea when we are going to see Destroyers for the Royal Navy? Any timeline or release schedule, perhaps?
×