Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'hood'.



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 23 results

  1. Hallöchen euch, am Dienstag den 24.09.2019 Stream ab 19:45, Event ab 20:45: werde ich zum 3. mal das Sink the Bismarck Event veranstalten, passend zum 1250 Follower Milestone Stream! Hier noch ein Rückblick zum 1. Event: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/413653126 und 2. Event https://www.twitch.tv/videos/429402738 Wann: 24.09.2019 ab 19:45 (Einladungen für das Event ab ca. 20.45) Wo: twitch.tv/neisch Discord: https://discord.gg/GcM5kEe Wie kann ich mitmachen? Schaut am 24.09. ab 19.45 meinen Twitch Stream oder seit schon vorher in dem entsprechenden Kanal im Discord, denn das Passwort für den Übungsraum wird als erstes im Discord bekannt gegeben, danach im Stream. Es wird nach dem Prinzip "First come first serve" ablaufen. Achja,bringt gute Laune und etwa 2 Stunden Zeit mit! Wird es auch was zu gewinnen geben? Ja sicher wird es was zu gewinnen geben! Falls noch jemand den ein oder anderen Preis Sponsoren möchte, sagt mir bitte hier im Forum per PN bescheid oder schreibt mich im Stream/Discord an Hier die Überarbeiteten Regeln: Sink the Bismarck Event am 24. September 2019 ab 19:45 Regeln: 1 Aufwärmrunde danach 3 Offizielle Runden mit Preisen. Alle Teilnehmer sollten mindestens Follower sein, Anwesenheit im Discord Voicechat erwünscht. Die Bismarck oder ARK Royal ab Runde 2 spiele natürlich ich, wo bleibt sonst der Spaß für mich und euch Die jeweilige Runde ist zu Ende wenn ein Team gewonnen hat. Bei der Hood und Nelson hat man Pech gehabt sollte die Bismarck sie zerstören. Teamkills werden nicht gewertet! Absichtliche Teamkills um dem gegnerischen Team den Hood/Nelson/Bismarck/Prinz Eugen Kill zu vermasseln werden mit einem Ausschluss vom Event bestraft. Das Passwort wird als erstes im Discord bekannt gegeben dann erst im Stream/Streamchannel. Radar bei der Edinburgh und die Belfast sind verboten! Hood ist das Deto Signal verboten! (historische Korrektheit hust) Zusätzlich je nach Verfügbarkeit bei den Spielern sind auch Scharnhorst, Gneisenau und Duke of York ,King George in einem Fairen Verhältniss in beiden Teams erlaubt. Runde 1: Hood und King George mit britischem Geleitschutz (Tier 4-7 Kreuzer und DD) vs. Bismarck und Prinz Eugen mit deutschem Geleitschutz (Tier 4-7 Kreuzer und DD) Preise je 1x für Bismarck, Prinz Eugen und Hood Kill Runde 2: 2x Britische Tier 6 CV + Nelson und Geleitschutz (Tier 4-7 Kreuzer) vs Bismarck und Prinz Eugen mit Geleitschutz ( Deutsche Tier 4-7 Kreuzer). Preis für Bismarck Kill, Nelson Kill, Prinz Eugen Kill Runde 3: Nelson + Edinburgh und Tier 6 CV mit britischem DD und Kreuzer Geleitschutz (Tier 4-7 ) vs Bismarck und Prinz Eugen mit deutschem DD und Kreuzer Geleitschutz ( Tier 4-7 DD). Preise für Bismarck Kill, Prinz Eugen und Nelson Kill Maps: Runde 1 Eismap, Runde 2 und 3 Ozean(Bearbeitet) Preisübersicht: Bismarck Kill: 500 Dublonen Hood Kill: 500 Dublonen Nelson Kill: 500 Dublonen Prinz Eugen Kill: 500 Dublonen Nach Runde 3 werden unter allen Teilnehmern 3x je 500 Dublonen und die ARK Royal verlost. Unter allen Zuschauern werden: 3 Unsinkable Sam Premium Container und 2x 1250 Dublonen Verlost! Wichtig: Wenn ihr mitmachen wollt bringt mindestens 90 Minuten Zeit mit und habt am besten ein oder mehrere passende Schiffe! Wer vorher raus muss wird ersetzt und ist für die Trostpreisverlosung nach Runde 3 nicht dabei. Es gilt wie immer die Regel, jeder 1 Gewinn, sollte der Gewinn Höher sein als das was man bisher gewonnen hat z.b. jemand hat 500 Dublonen gewonnen kann diese Person immernoch nen Container, 1250 Dublonen oder die Ark Royal gewinnen (sofern beim Event dabei) allerdings wird dieser Person dann die 500 Dublonen aberkannt und diese nochmal neu verrollt. Der Gedanke dahinter es soll für alle Fair bleiben so das keiner meckern kann äh der hat aber 2 Gewinnen oder eh ich hätte aber lieber nen Container statt 500 Dublonen. Ich freue mich auf eine rege Teilnahme, viel Spaß, lustige und epische Momente! Grüße Neisch
  2. Battlecruisers already in the game A lot has already been said about battlecruisers and how to add more of them to the game, and since Seydlitz, Derfflinger, Indefatigable, Renown or any other british or german BCs still haven't been added to the game (except for Hood and Scharnhorst, depending who you ask), there's still a lot more to say about it. So here are some thoughts about it. As a disclaimer, I'm not capable of the thorough, encyclopedic analysis that LWM can pull off. These are just some general ideas I've had, not a meticulous study going into the specifics about each ship. Let's start with those that are already in the game to see what WG has done so far with these ships, and where we can go from there. Japan For those who complain about not enough BCs in the game and how we need BC line splits for every nation that even dreamed about having one (I'm among those people, and I want my dedicated austro-hungarian battlecruiser line), we have to admit that there's already one line that's 46.15% battlecruisers, and that's the japanese line, with 6 of the13 BBs being battlecruisers, premiums included (I'm counting the Kii, 'cause it's even less protected than the Amagi, and ignoring the ARP Kongo sisters, 'cause photocopying the same ship over and over isn't the same as adding a new one; at least Ashitaka, Mutsu and Musashi are different in some way from their tech tree counterparts). Most of these ships are OK, with the Kongo and Amagi being among the best battleships in the game and thoroughly liked by players. The only true downer is the Myogi, which could be fixed by at least reducing its awful accuracy issues. The japanese battlecruisers are also good for trying to see how a british line would look like, since the low tier ones (namely Ishizuchi and Kongo) were designed in the UK, and the Ishizuchi even uses british guns. Overall they can be divided into three groups: Kongo, Ashitaka, Amagi and Kii on one hand, Ishizuchi on the other, and Myogi in a garbage can. The first group would be the purely japanese battlecruisers (as in, starting with the massive refit they did for the Kongo, they follow the line of the japanese navy, not a foreign design), while the Ishizuchi plays like a british ship with a japanese crew (which is great because the japanese knew how to properly store explosive propellant). The purely japanese have the following main characteristics: 1) Heavy, long range, somewhat inaccurate guns with powerful AP shells. Here Ashitaka's the exception, with only 19.9km range to Nagato's 20.5 (plus spotter plane) 2) High speed, generally 30 knots (29.5 for the Kii). 3) Average rudder shift time, but a big turning circle due to their length. 4) Lower armor than the average battleship, making them easy to penetrate when shooting at their broadside. The Ishizuchi changes point 1 by having terrible AP but good HE, shorter range that its same-tier battleship counterparts and only a 25 seconds reload time for the main guns. It is also slower, at 27.5 knots top speed, but still considerably faster than any other battleship at its tier. It also has even worse armor protection, being slightly better protected than a can of Pepsi Cola. In terms of play style, the first group minus Ashitaka acts as long range artillery support, throwing several tons of steel at >20km early on, then using their speed to keep the distance at medium or close ranges while angling to improve their armor's effectiveness. The Ishizuchi, having terrible AP but good HE, short(er) range and no spotter plane, can't act as long range artillery support in any way, shape or form. What it excels at is acting like a deranged pyromaniac against battleships and carriers, and like the Hetzer from Girls und Panzer vs. That One Jagdpanther against anything else. It has a good fire chance at 32% (36% with signal flags and commander skills) and decent alpha damage (or at least not that bad when compared with its AP). Also, since these are 305mm guns, and 10 of them, it can wreck modules on lightly armored ships with truly infuriating ease. It can also wreck destroyers better than most other battleships, thanks to its quicker reload and high number of guns. Ashitaka, having average range, slow reload and very good AP, sits at the middle. It can wreck battleships at medium to long ranges, but not long enough to stay away of its enemy's firing range. It can citadel cruisers with AP, but its HE's less effective at disabling them than Ishizuchi's. Being long, hard to maneuver and having a long reload time, it's not very good against destroyers. Finally, since all of them are fast, they're good at changing flanks when it's needed (but not so much at flanking enemies, since their thin armor means that they can't survive for long under focused fire, or charge against destroyers without support, so they can't lead flanking maneuvers). They're good support to other cruisers, providing hard-hitting guns and, in the case of Ishizuchi, keeping enemy cruisers immobilized and disabling their other modules (like torpedo launchers), blasting destroyers, or forcing battleships to spend their DCP after causing multiple fires. They have, however, that glaring weakness of battlecruisers: Their armor is weak. And in the case of Ishizuchi, borderline nominal (like just calling the hull itself "anti-water armor", and even then the lack of torpedo protection means that having an enemy DD aim its torpedoes at you long enough causes flooding). They're also long. Like, reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally long, so they're easy to hit when they expose their broadsides. Finally there's the Myogi, AKA that floating piece of garbage that WG forgot to pick up and throw away. This ship cannot be ignored when talking about battlecruisers for one very important reason: Many of the ships we'd like to see added to this game (and which I'll mention later on) have main armaments of four dual main turrets, one fore one aft, and two wing turrtes in echelon configuration. This means that for the most part you'll get an effective broadside of just six guns, and at low tiers battleship guns are horribly inaccurate, requiring at least eight shells per broadside to deal damage effectively. Myogi is fast, it has decent AA for its tier and its guns are the biggest tier for tier, being 16.7% bigger than most of its counterparts (356mm against 305), compared to Yamato's 9.5% (460mm against an average of 420mm) and Mutsu's 15.1% (410mm against 356mm). But they have an average rate of fire of 2rpm, and they're so inaccurate that it makes hitting targets (particularly during close range duels) more an act of luck than skill, also meaning that aiming for critical points is useless. With better dispersion and, more importantly, sigma (which, if I'm not mistaken, affects shell grouping), or at least better reload (which would pose a slight problem, since this ship has Kongo's guns, so it would be weird for it to shoot considerably faster than a ship one tier above), this ship would be a force to reckon with. But as it is a broadside of six shells with a reload of 30 seconds is not good and makes the ship a frustrating thing to play with, detrimental to the player and their team. France The reason why I go from Japan to this is because the Dunkerque, so far the only french battlecruiser (the only other actually-built candidate being its sister Strasbourg), is because offers a few good examples of a ship that's lacking in some qualities to be as good as it could be. The ship isn't bad, and those who played with it and learned how to use it will tell you that you can have lots of fun with it. But still, it has a few flaws that keep it from being considered a good ship by even more players. 1) Dunkerque's main guns have a caliber of 330mm at a tier where no other ship has less than 356mm. 2) They have a reload time of 28 seconds, only 2 less than the average for its tier. 3) It only has eight guns with bad dispersion. 4) All eight of them are mounted on two quadruple turrets that are extremely vulnerable to being disabled, or even destroyed (which doesn't propperly reflect the french design, which had an armored bulkhead in the middle, with two guns on each side, to prevent one single shot from disabling all of them at once). 5) Its secondary guns are terrible, mainly because most of them are aimed at the rear, and are short ranged. This leaves you with 3 main complaints against the ship: 1) If you want to keep the inaccuracy and low-damage shells, then its reload time, though lower than average, is not low enough to make this a fast-firing but inaccurate battleship like the germans. 2) If you want to keep the low-damage shells and the 28s reload speed, its accuracy is too low to make it a slow-reloading cruiser killer (though it can occasionally cause great damage to them). 3) If you want to keep the inaccuracy and the 28s reload speed, its shells lack striking power, being prone to bounces and shatters when they do hit, and only moderate damage when they do penetrate. Also, their high speed means that they often overpenetrate lightly armored targets. For clarification, these aren't big weaknesses. Dunkerque is overall a fun ship to use and it has a dedicated fan base. In decent hands it's a worthy oponent to most other ships, and rarely has a negative impact on its team (at least not more so than any other ship played by someone who's bad). What I mean to say is that it lacks something to make it stand out a bit more, and on its own the 2x4 forward-firing turrets are a weakness as much as an advantage. The lesson this ship leaves for any future battlecruiser is to make sure that its strengths and weaknesses are balanced correctly so they stand out and make the ship fun to play with for a good number of people. Britain So far the british have the Hood, and the first lesson from that ship is "don't make dumb gimmicks". Having one very specific set of extremely short range guns get a massive DPM bonus with DFAA is so situational that actually investing in it is detrimental to a player's overall performance. Hood's DFAA only works against either really dumb CV players who not only torp you at such a short distance that you can actually see the pilots giving you the middle finger after they drop their load (keep in mind that Hood's the longest Tier VII battleship), but also will continue to do this no matter how many squadrons they see being obliterated, or CV players using a ship that only uses dive bombers (AKA Graf Zeppelin players, and they're quite rare). And even then you have to invest all of your captain skills and upgrade modules to bring them to a jaw-dropping firing range of 2.1km. Putting that issue aside the Hood offers a good balance of strengths and weaknesses that make the ship fun and special. It may be lacking in some aspects (the biggest complaint against it is its inaccuracy being a bit too high for a ship with 4x2 381mm guns with 30s reload), but overall a decent ship. 1) Hood's guns may be inaccurate and lacking in penetration against heavily armored targets, but they can cause massive damage to cruisers, and their high shell trajectory means they can shoot over most obstacles, which is good when you're facing cruisers taking cover behind islands, or trying to use islands for cover yourself. 2) Its armor is nominally thin compared to other battleships, but thick enough to make the ship quite durable when properly angled. 3) It is really fast, making it great for supporting cruisers or changing flanks, and also for kiting enemies. 4) It may have a massive turning circle, but its rudder turns quite rapidly, so it's great for shooting while angled. You can shoot a full broadside, then turn to offer the best angle against enemy shells, then turn again to expose your rear turrets and shoot again. 5) Its firing angles are quite good, so you don't need to expose too much side armor to bring your rear turrets to bear. Hood, along with Amagi and IMHO Ashitaka, is a good example of what a high tier battlecruiser should be, particularly when you consider that if we're talking about a separate battlecruiser tech tree line, Tier VII would be the end of it, both for Britain and Germany, and after that it would merge with the main battleship line into fast battleships. Conclusion There are already enough battlecruisers in the game to prove that there's nothing stopping WG from adding the rest. Also, we have a few cautionary tales of what not to do when designing the game versions of real-life ships (or real-life paper designs). Britain British battlecruisers (mainly from the late 1900s and early 1910s) have three main characteristics: 1) Thin armor. The invincible class for example only had 152mm of belt armor at its thickest, and starting with the Lion it would get to just 229mm. 2) Fewer turrets than contemporary battleships early on, then the same number onwards. The two first classes of battlecruisers, Invincible and Indefatigable, had four dual turrets, but two were wing turrets in echelon configuration for a total effective broadside of six guns, and requiring the ship to angle itself perpendicularly to the target to fire a full broadside of eight. The Renown class on the other hand only had three dual turrets, compared to the Revenge and Queen Elisabeth class battleships that had four. 3) Their guns were the same as those of contemporary battleships. Unlike the germans Britain used the same guns both for battleships and battlecruisers. 4) Early on they had a faster rate of fire than battleships, mainly at the expense of safety procedures, which made their turrets more vulnerable to being destroyed or suffering Critical Existence Failure magazine detonations. 5) Since they were designed to hunt down armored cruisers and destroy other lighter ships, they were considerably faster than contemporary battleships. In game they would have guns equal to same-tier battleships, but shoot faster at the expense of one turret. The only exception to this would be at Tier VII, with a battlecruiser with two fewer, bigger guns with slower reload speed than the battleship at the same tier. Their turrets would also be more vulnerable to incapacitation, but not too much (that would make them too frustrating to play). Proposed ships by tier Tier III Invincible class 4x2 305 mm guns, with 2 as wing turrets in echelon 25 seconds reload 152mm belt armor 45,100 hit points 25 knots top speed HMS New Zealand (premium) 4x2 305 mm guns, with 2 as wing turrets in echelon 25 seconds reload 152mm belt armor 44,200 hit points 25.9 knots top speed Tier IV Lion class 4x2 343mm guns, two front superfiring, one rear and one between the funnels 26 seconds reload 229mm belt armor 51,600 hit points 27.5 knots HMS Queen Mary (premium) 4x2 343mm guns, two front superfiring, one rear and one between the funnels 28 seconds reload 229mm belt armor 53,000 hit points 28 knots Tier V HMS Tiger (tech tree) 4x2 343mm guns, two front & two aft superfiring 26 seconds reload 229mm belt armor 57,000 hit points 28 knots NOTES: It should mount a spotter plane Tier VI Renown class 3x2 381mm guns, two front superfiring, one aft 26 seconds reload 229mm belt armor 59,500 hit points 32.5 knots NOTES: Final hull should mount a strong AA armament HMS Repulse (premium) 3x2 381mm guns, two front superfiring, one aft 26 seconds reload 229mm belt armor 61,000 hit points 31 knots NOTES: It should have a fast rudder shift to compensate for lack of AA and reflect the number of torpedoes it dodged IRL. Tier VII Admiral class 4x2 381mm guns, two front & two aft superfiring 30 seconds reload 305mm belt armor 65,000 hit points 33 knots NOTES: A hull should mount several secondary guns; final hull should exchange that for strong AA armament and a spotter plane HMS Hood (premium) 4x2 381mm guns, two front & two aft superfiring 30 seconds reload 305mm belt armor 67,000 hit points 32 knots NOTES: Instead of the Defensive AA consumable it should have a better Repair Party consumable that's better than average, but still not as good as Nelson's After that the line merges with the main battleship line with the Monarch, continuing as it is. Germany What would any wargame be without the germans? Fiction, that's what. And even fictional games require a faction that looks like Germany. So there you go: You can't make a wargame, be it strategy or FPS, without the germans. For this particular game, and concerning battlecruisers, Germany's ships were faster than contemporary battleships (a must for battlecruisers in general, some of them even faster than their contemporary british counterparts), well armored (usually on par with battleships of the previous generation) and when it came to main guns they followed one of two principles: Either the same as battleships, but with fewer turrets (Von der Tann compared to Nassau), or the same number of turrets, but with lower caliber guns (Moltke compared to Kaiser). And so, here is my proposal Proposed ships by tier Tier III Von der Tann (tech tree) 4x2 281mm guns, with 2 as wing turrets in echelon 22.2 seconds reload 250mm belt armor 36,500 hit points 27.75 knots NOTES: Its rudder shift time should be slightly better than Nassau's, maybe 9 seconds Tier IV Moltke class 5x2 281mm guns, with 2 as wing turrets in echelon and 2 superfiring aft 22.2 seconds reload 280mm belt armor 40,500 hit points 28.4 knots NOTES: WG please don't do what you did with Kaiser and keep this ship's appearance close to its historical counterpart SMS Seydlitz (premium) 5x2 281mm guns, with 2 as wing turrets in echelon and 2 superfiring aft 22.2 seconds reload 300mm belt armor 42,500 hit points 28.1 knots Tier V Derfflinger class 4x2 305mm guns, two front & two aft superfiring 25 seconds reload 300mm belt armor 46,500 hit points 27 knots SMS Lutzow (premium) 4x2 305mm guns, two front & two aft superfiring 24 seconds reload 300mm belt armor 48,200 hit points 26,4 knots Tier VI Ersatz Yorck class 4x2 380mm guns, two front & two aft superfiring 30 seconds reload 300mm belt armor 50,000 28 knots SMS Mackensen (premium) 4x2 350mm guns, two front & two aft superfiring 24 seconds reload 300mm belt armor 50,500 hit points 28 knots NOTES: I propose giving it the Hydroacoustic Search consummable SMS Prinz Eitel Friedrich (premium) 4x2 350mm guns, two front & two aft superfiring 24 seconds reload 300mm belt armor 50,500 hit points 28 knots NOTES: I propose giving this ship 2x3 torpedo launchers The reason I put the Ersatz Yorck in the tech tree instead of the Mackensen is because of the following: 1) Putting the Ersatz Yorck at Tier VII means that the last battlecruiser in the line is slower than its same-tier german battleship counterpart, while at Tier VI it keeps having the speed advantage over the Bayern that BCs should keep. 2) As you'll see below, this opens up space for the L 20e α battleship, which allows for almost all german dreadnoughts to be added to the game (we can have the SMS Ostfriesland as a premium) and makes for a better progression from Bayern to Bismarck on the battleship side, while allowing for the battlecruiser line to finish in a ship that's equal parts battleship and battlecruiser, blurring the line between the two, which is exactly why the class came to an end when fast battleships became the norm. And the reason I add the SMS Prinz Eitel Friedrich, even though it is another Mackensen class battlecruiser is because that name's too good and classy to pass. It's like with the italian cruisers: The ship may be meh overall, but having the name "Emanuele Filiberto Duca d'Aosta" makes it all better. EDIT: Called it! Glad to see WeeGee adding this beauty to the game. And though I'd love to get a Mackensen that looked exactly like it was meant to look back in WWI, the fictional upgrade they did looks really good (unlike Kaiser's and König's), so I don't really have a complaint about that. So thanks to WeeGee Deevs for this, I hope we can play with it soon. At Tier VII I'd suggest making a change with the Gneisenau, putting it as the last of the battlecruisers, while placing the L22c configuration of the L 20e α class as the Tier VII battleship: Tier VII L 20e α class (battleship) 4x2 380mm guns, two front & two aft superfiring 30 seconds reload 350mm belt armor 63,500 hit points 26 knots Gneisenau class (battlecruiser) 3x2 380mm guns, two front superfiring & one aft 26 seconds reload 350mm belt armor 58,200 hit points 32 knots After that both merge with Bismarck and the line continues as it is. Pan-European (austro-hungarian and dutch designs) Austria-Hungary and the Netherlands have enough for low and medium tech tree battlecruisers for a Pan-european tree from Tier IV to Tier VII. The first three tiers could be covered with austro-hungarian designs. These may require a slight fictional upgrade to their AA armament at Tier V and VI. The final ship would be the dutch 1047 design, but with a fictional main armament of 3x2 380mm guns. The reason for this is to maintain the line's progression. The line would follow this principle: On even-numbered tiers it would have ships with an effective broadside of six heavy guns. The following ship would carry the same type of guns, but have greater firepower, first by improving the gun configuration to give an effective broadside of eight guns, then by increasing the rate of fire. They would be fast ships with unimpressive AA, no torpedo armament, and no spotter plane until Tier VII. Also, the 3x3 283mm configuration for the 1047 design could be used as a high-tier cruiser. Tier IV K.u.K. Project Ic design 4x2 356mm guns. One fore, one aft, two wing turrets in echelon 30 seconds reload 225mm belt armor 40,000 hit points 30 knots NOTES: This ship is basically the case I mentioned when discussing Myogi's problems. I think an effective broadside of six heavy shells deserves good dispersion, so this ship should have no more than 220m dispersion and no less than 1.9 sigma. Tier V K.u.K. Project If design 4x2 356mm guns. Two fore and two aft superfiring 30 seconds reload 225mm belt armor 45,000 hit points 30 knots NOTES: This ship would be like the Kongo, but lacking the spotter plane. The original design didn't account for aviation, so I see two options. Option 1 is to give the ship a fictional average AA and good maneuvrability. Option 2 is to give it good AA and average maneuvrability. Tier VI K.u.K. project IV design 3x2 380mm guns. One fore, one aft, one center line facing forward 28 seconds reload 225mm belt armor 50,000 30 knots NOTES: This ship would be somewhat similar to the Repulse, but with even less AA. With a 28 seconds reload, it should have slightly above average dispersion/sigma. Tier VII Dutch Design 1047 3x3 283mm guns (option 1) / 3x2 380mm guns (option 2). Two fore superfiring, one aft 20 seconds reload (option 1) / 25 seconds reload (option 2) 225mm belt armor 55,000 hit points (Tier VI) 34 knots NOTES: This ship would resemble the Scharnhorst or Gneisenau (depending on its main armament), but with thinner armor and greater speed. It would also lack torpedo armament. The real main armament would be the 3x3 283mm guns, but I recommend the fictional 2x3 380mm configuration to continue the progression from Austria-Hungary's project IV, with higher reload speed instead of a greater effective broadside as with the Project Ic to Project If progression. Japan Japan could have a brief line split at tiers VII and VIII by putting the B-65 design at Tier VII (as a japanese equivalent to Scharnhorst), then moving Amagi into this BC split at Tier VIII, replacing it for the Tosa class battleship. It would then merge back with the Izumo. Alternatively, the B-65 could be added as a premium, either at Tier VII as a battleship, or at Tier IX as a cruiser. Tier VII (battleship) or Tier XI (cruiser) Design B-65 3x3 310mm guns (option 1)/3x2 356mm guns (option 2) 20 seconds reload (option 1)/ 24 seconds reload (option 2) 210mm belt armor 58,000 to 60,000 hit points (Tier VII battleship) or 67,500 to 72,500 hit points (Tier IX cruiser) 33 knots NOTES: Since this ship also fits the pattern of high tier cruisers with close to 300mm guns, WG could add this as a japanese high tier freemium cruiser, but I'd rather have it as a Tier VII battleship, and for the sake of this line split, I'll place it there. Minor nations By "Minor nations" I don't mean small navies, but rather navies that only had a few designs. Of these there are several, and I'll be covering some. Russia There are two designs, one from the imperial navy and another from the soviet navy. The first one, the Izmail/Borodino (I prefer the first name), is basically a more lightly armored, faster Imperator Nikolai I with 4x3 356mm guns (ideal for Tier V or VI). The second one, the Kronstadt, of which WG already took the name, looked in one version like the 3x2 380mm Gneisenau. Tier V or VI Izmail class 4x3 356mm guns 35 seconds reload (Tier V) / 28 seconds reload (Tier VI) 237.5mm belt armor 50,000 hit points (Tier V) / 55,000 hit points (Tier VI) 26.5 knots NOTES: I'd suggest using the ship's rudder shift to balance it at Tier VI, giving it a rudder shift time to compensate its lack of AA. For Tier V it could be balanced with slightly higher dispersion/slightly lower sigma if the extra 5 seconds reload is insufficient. Tier VII Sevastopol (Kronstadt class) 3x2 380mm guns 26 seconds reload 230mm belt armor 60,000 hit points 32 knots NOTES: The ship would be very similar to the Gneisenau, but with considerably thinner armor, requiring some other advantage to compensate, other than just a slightly greater hit point pool. United States The US has that giant behemoth with five to seven funnels called the Lexington, which would require a new name (we still need Saratoga for a premium CV), maybe Constellation or Constitution. Actually, lets have both, one at Tier VI and the other at Tier VII. Their main armament would be the same as Colorado's. Tier VI USS Constellation (Lexington class, early design) 4x2 406mm guns 32 seconds reload 237.5mm belt armor 60,000 hit points 27.5 knots NOTES: This would be the 5-funnels version. The original design they chose for construction had minimal AA, so that should be improved with all those short and medium range AA guns american battleships are famous for. It shouldn't be too good, though. Just enough to shoot down one plane during their approach, maybe an aditional one while they return. Tier VII USS Constitution (Lexington class, final design) 4x2 406mm guns 30 seconds reload 237.5mm belt armor 65,000 hit points 32 knots NOTES: This would be the version that was approved for construction. The original design they chose for construction had minimal AA, so that should be improved with all those short and medium range AA guns american battleships are famous for. Commonwealth Australia operated the only battlecruiser of all commonwealth nations, Her Majesty's Australian Ship Australia, of the Indefatigable class. Gimmicks aside, it would be just like the HMS New Zealand I proposed above (which was paid for, but not operated by, New Zealand). Wargaming must add this ship. The Queen of Australia demands it. Turkey No nation is more generous than the germans when it comes to gifting ships trapped by the Royal Navy to nations they want to join their fight (the german's fight, not the Royal Navy's), and so the SMS Goeben was gifted to the Otoman Empire (AKA Turkey plus all expansion packs, available only for PC). The ship was renamed Yavuz Sultan Selim and thankfully kept its german crew and commander, because if it hadn't its gimmicks would be having a thoroughly inexperienced crew and losing to Grece. Yavuz Sultan Selim is a Moltke-class battlecruiser, so it would be similar to that one in its WWI configuration. However, unlike the rest of the Imperial German Navy the ship survived the war and continued to serve Turkey well into the 1970s, so there are a lot of real modernizations that could make the ship unique, and maybe even suited for a higher tier. France France had a number of never-built designs, for which I'll leave the following link: http://www.naval-encyclopedia.com/ww1/France/french-ww1-battlecruisers The problem with french battlecruisers is that Wargaming alread took the french battleships of that era (namely Normandie and Lyon) and boosted their speed considerably, to the point where Normandie is even faster than Gille's and Durand-Viel's proposals. So, though they could be added (it would be nice to have them), they would be just like Tier VI and VII french battleships, maybe a little faster than Lyon, but also a little slower than Normandie. Here's one proposal for adding one of them into the game. This would be Durand-Viel's A type battlecruiser: http://shipcomrade.com/news/273/battlecruiser-wednesdays-bordeaux-fra.htm This ship would basically work like Gascogne, and Gascogne has proven to be a nice ship. This is all I could find for now. Many of these ships are quite similar to one another, or to already-incorporated ships, for the simple reason that Germany and Britain were the main sources of inspiration for battlecruiser design (in fact, "similar to Scharnhorst or Gneisenau" is a recurring topic for interwar battlecruisers). Some could also be used for high tier cruisers, following the principle of Kronstadt or Stalingrad. The main distinguishing feature in the end would be gimmicks, and I don't have many ideas for those.
  3. _Snurfer_

    HMS Hood vs. Nelson

    Hallo zusammen, da es die Hood gerade vergünstigt zu kaufen gibt, mache ich mir so meine Gedanken um das Schiff. Dem gegenüber steht aber die Nelson. Ich bin mir nicht ganz sicher bei der Hood. Das einzige Alleinstellungsmerkmal der Hood, ist die Nahbereichsflak. Die hat schon was. Bei dem was ich bisher so gelesen und gesehen habe, entspricht die Hood ja eigentlich mehr einem Schlachtkreuzer. Dafür finde ich das Trefferbild dann aber sehr RNG lastig. Wobei laut den Stats die max. Streuung ja gleich ist. Die doch recht ansprechende Geschwindigkeit des Schiffes ist auf jeden Fall ein Plus. Bei der Nelson gefällt mir die Turmstellung sehr gut und das sie dadurch ja eben doch etwas Besonderes ist. Im Gegensatz zur Izumo können alle Türme nach vorne drehen. Was ich ziemlich nice bei finde. Auch das etwas höhere Kaliber buche ich mal zu den Vorteilen. Dadurch sind die Pen Werte dann hoffentlich doch etwas besser. Die Mündungsgeschwindigkeit ist bei der Nelson auch höher. Ich hoffe, dass sich dadurch der Geschwindigkeitsverlust des größeren Kalibers während des Fluges etwas ausgleicht. Mir tut es dann aber doch etwas weh, meine Free XP für ein Schiff zu investieren. Alles was ich bisher geschrieben habe, basiert nicht auf eigenen Erfahrungen und ich lasse mich gerne eines Besseren belehren.
  4. I'm still scratching my head about the AA / CV rework and how it impacts Hood, which I used to run as an AA boat. The in-game info panel tells me nothing - clicking the individual mounts just shows the guns, doesn't give me info about which range-grouping each corresponds to; and looking at the info breakdown for those range-bands isn't massively helpful. A look on the WOWS fitting tool shows the close-range AA DPS is incredibly low, with rockets not apparently creating flak bursts nor making the base close-range DPS much better than KGV. Wiki is still recommending Advanced Firing Training, and saying the defensive fire consumable applies to the rockets with a x2 modifier which is still significantly less than KGV's base if we're to accept the short-range DPS value given. Could someone please explain to me what the hell is going on? Because as far as I can get a read on it, AFT is now "meh" for the Hood because it doesn't improve the close-range rockets' continuous damage, BFT is more appropriate because it DOES synergise with the defensive fire consumable - but is probably still a waste because the improved AA is lacklustre anyway; which makes both the AA upgrades on the ship redundant because it's no longer fit for purpose as an AA specialist. Is this about the size of it?
  5. lovelacebeer

    HMS Hood play advice

    I was kindly given the HMS Hood as a gift a while back and whilst I do love having her I have never been able to really play the ship to its full potential, certainly compared to other battleships I have, so any advice or suggestions would be welcome. I realise that with the faster arming time her AP is great for dealing damage to cruisers, but much less likely to citadel battleships, so I have been going for the battlecrusier role in her, trying to use the speed to keep up with cruisers pushing flanks (when that happens) but I struggle with her poor accuracy. The Hood is extremely vulnerable to HE just like all British battleships but with so few guns the accuracy really is a massive draw back when compared to other battleships although all battleship players are at the mercy of RNG, meaning that I will probably loose a lot of health before I can finally finish off the cruisers I'm usually hunting especially if friendly cruisers have fallen victim to accurate BB fire. The one thing I do like about the Hood is her AA apparently a lot of CV players don't realise she has the AA boost so there is a certain satisfaction of taking out their first strike and only having to dodge the couple of torpedos that make it into the water. Can anyone who has the Hood suggest alternative ways to play her or is her wildly inaccurate guns her thing like they are with the Gneisnaeu and you just have to accept it?
  6. Ahoi Kapitäne, wurden die Tarnungen für die Bismarck und die Hood entfernt ? Ich meine hier die Tarnungen aus dem Event Jagd auf die Bismarck. Hab im Bulletin gesucht, aber nichts gefunden. Die Tarnungen sind bei mir verschwunden, vermutlich seit 0.8.0. Danke und Moin.
  7. Good evening all, I just quit a match with the HMS Hood where my defensive fire consumable (Y) and AA in general would not work. Now I am aware of the P button that can switch AA and seconadries off but this was not the issue. I have logged a ticket with WG but I wasn't recording the match. So my question is has anyone come across this bug with any of their ships? Basically a consumable not working even though you are pressing the corresponding key and/or guns of some sort not working? Because of this bug I was an easy target for the carrier once he realised I was defenseless. I am well aware of the old bug making guns useless whereby no matter how many times you click you cannot fire but I though this had been fixed. If it is making a comeback they better patch it quick. Kind regards, Hj
  8. Ok, have had Hood since release (I know, I have more money than sense, hey ho) I am an average player - average win rate about 49, recent 53 the recent win rate is down to the hood, I find this better for me than the Warspite as it seems to suit my style, Current stats on the Hood for me are: Battles - 223 Win Rate - 55% Average results; destroyed - 1, aircraft 2.8, xp - 1372 have had some fab games in the hood, much better than in the Scharnhorst (prev best ship), at least 3 krakens and generally seem to play better. Massively tanky if you use her correctly, guns are meh but work when you are used to them. Against high tiers often seems to pay to use HE due to the high number of shatters/over pen that hood seems to get. Have tried a number of different set ups for the captain and modules; have tried full AA set up; main battery set up, steering gears, aiming mods, secondary set ups. for me the set up I have settled with is; main armaments mod 1 secondary armaments mod 2 damage control mod 1 propulsion mod 1 The rationale for this set up is; guns are meh therefore going down the aiming/main mod 2 route doesn't really make that much difference. The secondaries and the addition to the AA does make a difference in the right place/time. The propulsion mod I settled late on having tried steering etc, hood seems a bit sluggish in its speed up (not top speed, acceleration) and this makes a big difference in battle. Captain skills have gone with (after trying a few different): Preventative Maintenance Jack of all, Adrenaline Superintendent AFT and Concealment I agree with the other reviewers, not OP not UP but interesting and think works for me, better that others at the same tier - even the Scharn. What do others think?
  9. Last day to get the Hood was June 19th and I wasn't able to buy it. Since the British lineup has been delayed to a unknown date.. Will we see Hood again in the store or in the Tech Tree for purchase? https://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/special/hunt-for-bismarck/
  10. JG4_sKylon

    Reportage HMS Hood

    Heute 19:30 Uhr auf ZDF-Info kommt eine Reportage. "Schiffslegenden: Der Schlachtkreuzer "HMS Hood".
  11. WhiteCliffs

    38 games with Hood

    I've played 38 games now with Hood, having picked up the third week bundle (£40-odd one), thought I'd share some early thoughts. I get the impression a good few people are thinking about picking her up on Friday, without the tinsel, as if were, so maybe this will be helpful. She's very fast, and that feels great. She is tanky too, to a degree, but don't mistake tanky for invincible. While your citadel is safe, angled bow or stern on expect to suffer not infrequent 7k+ hits from your bigger BB peers (Colorado, Nagato). With 70k HP that's not tragic but they do whittle away. Being a long lady torpedoes will be your woe. Yes, Defencive Fire infers a cost in planes to any attacking CV but it by no means protects you from their torps. I run a standard tanky build, not one focused on AA, so consider that, but on a couple of occasions now I've traded 5 or 6 well dropped torps for 8 or so aircraft, I'm still left limping off crippled. Carriers definitely think twice about attacking early game though so she's better off than most BBs here. Your real issue will be the guns. They are infuriatingly inconsistent. Expect to land 1/8 shells from many a well aimed salvo. Unlike Bismarck, which does feel similar, there is no reward for pushing aggressively in toward that 10km range, except greater risk of death by torpedo. Compounding this, sitting at T7 1 in every 3 games or so will be spent wondering how to trade favourably with an angled North Carolina, and occasionally you'll be left cowering as Iowas and Izumos slug it out. Overall opinion then, thinking myself an average to slightly above average BB player (considering some of the potatoes cruising the waters of random battles). I often think that faced so frequently with more heavily armed opponents and without the secondary/torp perks of her German counterparts, she needs a sigma buff - damage wise she has 8 guns, that's all she has, and you can't rely on them. Citadels on cruisers are frequently a 1/8 shell hit, which just seems bizarre, like I'm riding luck more than aiming well. But then shells are landing in front and behind the target, so I don't know what more I can do on my end. Then I think about it more, and perhaps giving her a 2.0 would make her too strong, she's superior in essentially every way to Gneisenau, obviously Scharnhorst is a little bit different, but I don't fear them either. At T7 I think she's competitive, maybe even strong compared with other battleships. Her biggest problem is match making, because you will face Bismarck, Tirpitz, North Carolina, Washington and Amagi very frequently. Any angled cruiser will be a nightmare to hit, so I see her role as one of dealing opportune damage to anything broadside and in the meantime chipping away at enemy BBs, which at T8 is essentially impossible to do favourably. Up at T9 you stand little chance of contributing anything, just accept that. So, she isn't a bad ship, she's too tough and fast for that, I think she sits well at T7, but she is cursed with probably the worst match making in the game. And I know there was a thread on this, but can we please have a camo for her that's historically accurate without giving up £80? She never wore this weird Arizona scheme to engage Bismarck, or the standard premium one. I've added a pic of WG's idea of what Hood looked like on her final voyage and a photo from the Hood Association of Hood on that final voyage, in what they describe as 'a uniform medium grey'. Stick the Home Fleet dark grey or Foreign Stations light grey on for 3000 doubloons and I'll buy it. Anyway, I've also added some pics of my Hood and Warspite stats, deduce what you will. Hope someone finds this vaguely useful.
  12. XbodzioXplX

    Rozdają HOODa - szybko!

    http://wheresmybismarck.hscampaigns.com/ Podajcie nick i maila w grze Jest to ze streama Izolatea z Mr Conwayem Powodzenia ludki!
  13. As the title suggests, how are those of us who purchased the bundle doing... and how would you rate her performance? As ashamed as I am to admit it, I got the top bundle yesterday... I wanted Hood in her clean historical appearance and the top bundle was the only way to achieve that with her flag. Never thought I'd spend that amount of money on a single premium, however as a Brit the Hood has a special place in my heart and I wanted to sail her since the CBT days trolling everyone in my Warspite. I would also like to state, that although I purchased the bundle... I do not condone the use of a staggered release by Wargaming. I was going to get the top package regardless of release date to achieve the look I wanted. Sadly, Wargaming knows this and bleeds us dry for it. My views of the staggered release in other threads still stand. Anyhow, on to the reason why I created this thread in the first place... In the first nine games I played in the Hood, I've found her to be a fast and quite fun ship to play. She's a hell of a tank and with the turret traverse buffs her guns are actually comfortable to play with even if their overall accuracy leaves something to be desired at times. My main problem currently, is the number of non-penetrating hits I'm getting. I know that the Hood uses extremely similar ammunition to the Warspite, in that they are quite heavy shells with a longer time to target than those fired on the IJN and Kreigsmarine BB's. However, despite their weight I'm getting a lot of non-pens even against the sides of broadside on BB's at ranges of <10km. Did Wargaming's alterations to the fuse delay on them skew their performance somehow? Never seen this kind of shell behaviour on other BB's I play. The AA is decent too, and the defensive fire is strong although it doesn't counter torpedo bombers are hard as it does dive bombers. To compare I got dropped by a Hiyru who kept his planes outside the short range of my UP Rockets and met with moderate success due to the size of the ship. The Ranger who tried the same thing didn't fare well, losing about 9 planes in quick succession with only a few hits. Hood's speed is quite something for a BB, I was able to switch flanks and rush back to defend our cap several times which simply wouldn't have been possible on other lines especially in the Colorado! In all, I'm pleased with the ship. If nothing else, she's an absolute BEAUTY and it's easy to see why she was held in such high regard during her peacetime service career.
  14. Hood comes back for revenge in World of Warships. Do watch the video in 1080p60 to get the full effect.Enjoy it!
  15. Taliesn

    Hood is coming

    Pues eso, teaser del Hood BB Tier VII http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/76591-hms-hood-1940-version-inbound-as-t7-premium-bb/page__pid__1716061__st__20#entry1716061
  16. The first part of a series about the hunt for the Bismarck. The video is sponsored by Wargaming. Quote video text box: During World War II, the Bismarck was the pride of the German navy - and the nightmare of Great Britain. It was enormous, overpowered, and a constant threat to the seas. So when they got word that the Bismarck had mobilized, the British raced to stop it.
  17. Jacob_J_Weebs

    HMS Hood AA test

  18. arczer25

    Hood citadel

    just noticed, Hood citadel seems to be to low, its either citadel height or ship sitting to deep in the water. here are armor schemes: according to that waterline is at 1/3 of inclined deck, in game citadel deck is exactly at waterline in mean time Nagato with waterline starting in middle of inclined deck there is difference
  19. Generic_Guy13

    HMS Hood discussion

    Hey guys, how are we all doing? Following the release of Warspite and the upcoming release of the Bismark, I was thinking about other ships of fame and infamy that WG may release as premiums (or not, that isn't really the point here). I came to HMS Hood, and it strikes me that The differences between Hood and the Queen Elizabeth class battleships are not all that great. She is longer with a wider beam (at least before modifications) and so is a larger vessel with a largely similar armour profile (again depending on how detailed WG are going to go into armour modelling). Hood is also faster by four knots, and seems to lack an aircraft catapult in it's configuration when sunk. However, it seems the two classes are so similar that Hood has been under discussion, having been re-categorized as a fast battleship rather than a battlecruiser by a few historians. My questions to you are, How do you think WG are going to make Hood or the Admiral class unique especially when it is so similar to the QE class battleships? How do you think gameplay will flow in the ship? Can it compete with ships at it's supposed tier (7)? Cheers.
  20. Heute vor 75 Jahren sank das Schiff, das bis heute einen legendären Status unter Kriegsschifffreunden hat - die Bismarck. In ihrer kurzen Einsatzkarriere kam alles vor: Kampf, Triumph, Flucht und entsetzliche Niederlage. Vor langer Zeit hab ich ein Video zur Bismarck gemacht: (die englische Übersetzung ist vielleicht nicht unbedingt 100% korrekt ) Da hab ich irgendwie ne falsche Uhrzeit im Kopf, tatsächlich wars wohl 10 Uhr 40 ^^
  21. iTchyfoot

    Would you buy The Hood?

    Howdy, folks, one day, I hope, we might see The "Mighty" Hood in the game. Thing is, it's an Admiral-class battlecruiser, so it won't be in the regular tech-tree, and thus it will be a premium ship (if and when released). Now, everybody knows The Hood. My question is, would you buy it? I must admit, I will buy it (if released). No matter the price, bundle, or any other stuff. I just want The Hood. I have some of the premium ships in the game, even the Tirpitz, so I don't really need another. My Tier 10 choices for now are Montana, Zao, and Shimakaze (getting there). Couldn't care less for the Russkies, German ships are unappealing to me, the only another navy I am interested in playing right now is RN. I was actually thinking about buying the Warspite when it was available couple of weeks back, but my hope of seeing The Hood one day has prevented me from doing so. Because it's The Hood, man. So, I'd sell my pants to get it, would you?
  22. __Snapdragon__

    Discussion about Bismarck

    In order to follow Hanszeehock wish to continue the discussion about the Bismarck in a new thread. Here you go. Maybe it wasn't Bismarcks merit that she outran, but her destruction was not "her fault" either. It was a damaged rudder which was her fate. And even then it took 2 heavy cruisers and 2 destroyers about more than an hour to sink her. And the sinking in the end was indeed a selfdestruction! "Norfolk had used her last torpedoes; therefore, Dorsetshire launched four torpedoes which may have hit Bismarck at comparatively short range. Although the battleship's upper works were almost completely destroyed, her engines were still functioning and the hull appeared to be relatively sound; therefore, rather than risk her being captured, First Officer Hans Oels ordered the men below decks to abandon ship; he instructed the engine room crews to open the ship's watertight doors and prepare scuttling charges." (Source) "Moreover, neither the main belt nor the armour deck seemed to have been penetrated during the combat2, and in the end it was her own crew who scuttled the ship. During this last engagement 2,876 shells were fired at the Bismarck. They are itemised as follows: 380 of 40.6 cm from Rodney 339 of 35.6 cm from King George V 527 of 20.3 cm from Norfolk 254 of 20.3 cm from Dorsetshire 716 of 15.2 cm from Rodney 660 of 13.3 cm from King George V It will never be known how many of them did actually hit (200, 300, maybe more?), but taking into account the short distances in the last phase of the action, it is assumed that many shells hit." (Source) Just to mention two sources. EDIT: I found out that Battle of Bismarck isn't the best thread name due to The Battle of the Bismarck Sea. How can I change the topic name, or if I cannot: Could a moderator maybe change the topic name to "Discussion about Bismarck"? Thanks in advance!
×