Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'rn'.



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
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Topluluk
    • Comunità Italiana
  • 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 45 results

  1. 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?
  2. Nachdem Wargaming freundlicherweise mit der Royal Navy nun auch endlich eine der irrelevanten Seefahrernationen (nach bekannten Größen wie der sovietischen Flotte...) eingefügt hat, werde ich mich nun doch ein wenig motivierter mit World of Warships befassen. Demnach kreuzt nun bald eine kanadische Lady mit britischen Schiffen in internationalen Gewässern. Warum ich den Thread dennoch hier und nicht in der englischsprachigen Sektion eröffne ist schnell erklärt: Die Gentlemen des British Tank Clubs treiben sich in diesem Forenbereich herum und haben bereits Hilfe zugesagt. Nach einigen Gefechten aus den Anfangstagen von WoWs stand relativ schnell der Entschluss das Spiel einzumotten bis endlich die Royal Navy eingeführt wird. Die bisherigen Gefechte (es dürften 16 gewesen sein) fanden ohne jede Orientierung in den Stufen Eins und Zwei statt, wobei der Fokus eher auf japanischen Modellen lag. (Als Kanadierin gestatte ich mir einfach einmal ein paar Vorbehalte gegenüber amerikanischen Erzeugnissen...) Nun soll es allerdings richtig losgehen und zwar mit den britischen Kreuzern. Was man so im Forum dazu lesen durfte ist zwar nicht grade ermutigend, allerdings werde ich mich konsequent an die Royal Navy halten, von oben erwähnten Spielen einmal abgesehen. Ich bitte um Nachsicht, dass etwaige Kürzel und Termini noch nicht verinnerlicht wurden. Weiterhin bin ich durch World of Tanks vorbelastet. Auch wenn mir die Unterschiede zwischen einem Panzer und einem Schiff durchaus geläufig sind, so kann es vorkommen, dass die Grenze im Eifer des Gefechts verschwimmen (was für ein mieser Wortwitz...). Vielleicht hilft es, dass ich viel Artillerie gefahren bin, der man ja bösartigerweise eine gewisse eine gewisse Affinität zu Gewässern nachsagt. Kartenkunde ist noch nicht vorhanden, die Videos dazu genieße ich lieber mit Vorsicht, wie alle spielerischen Empfehlungen seitens Wargaming. Was man als Kreuzer so zu tun hat konnte ich noch nicht wirklich ausprobieren, da auf den ersten beiden Stufen noch nicht einmal alle Schiffsklassen verfügbar sind. Ansonsten hoffe ich auf allerlei Hinweise, Anleitung und Nachsicht bis sich mein spielerisches Niveau auf erträglichem Maße eingependelt hat. Hochachtungsvoll, Easha
  3. Greetings fellow forumites, Having my PC dying on me while travelling has left me with way too much time on my hands. HMS Vanguard I'll quickly go over the historical aspect of the ship, although not too much in detail. As you can see, she had a rather uneventful career and a somewhat sad end to her. How would she translate in game? Well, here is where the fun begins, and we don't even need the RN superheal to make it work. Survivability Armament: Anti-air Maneuverability Concealment Overall, what we find based on these (projected) stats, is that Vanguard would be, above all else, an actual (classical, so to speak) tank. She would make use of her hitpoints and [angled] armour to soak up damage, while dishing it out just as well. I decided not to give her any gimmicky consumable, so she is basically just a BB with good anti-air, strong (while certainly not the strongest) armour and generally just a sturdy ship. She doesn't get hydro, or radar (which she could comfortably have, given her radar equipment out of the shipyard), she doesn't even get an aircraft, as the only aircraft she ever had were rotary wing (and those aren't in the game) Hope you guys like the proposal, it would be cool to see the last ever BB in the game. Gallery, via MaritimeQuest
  4. Habe ein Gefecht gewonnen aber keine Punkte dafür bekommen - Ist das ein Systemfehler ? Hattet Ihr das auch schon mal?
  5. Hi all, From NA forum (but appliciable to EU as well - 1 day later): "PSA: British Early-Access Destroyers, Final Call." https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/172645-psa-british-early-access-destroyers-final-call/ Leo "Apollo11" P.S. Due to post by @Sehales some things must be additionally cleared because all early access RN DDs were "Premium" by default...
  6. Leo_Apollo11

    What is the "flavor" of the new RN DDs?

    Hi all, What is the "flavor" of the new RN DDs? I only have "Campbelltown" and "Gallant" (no luck with RN Containers )... Leo "Apollo11"
  7. Hello, Is there any one who calculates how much sovereign will win in total from this rn mode? Without purchasing premium rn box and not counting the hall of fame. I won 60 in a week. Is it going to be 240 a month? So we will earn 720 in 3 months in total? Is math right?
  8. Hi all, What is your "strategy" regarding RN Guineas and Sovereigns? I bought 10 Guineas for 0.84 Euros and expect to get to 50 for the Tier VIII RN DD "Cossack" via normal play in "Directives". I hope to get 100 Sovereigns to get "Bert Dunkirk" and, possibly (if that is achievable at all via normal play), to get 220/200 additional Sovereigns for buying back my already existing "Warspite" / "Gallant" (and getting full Doubloons return). Leo "Apollo11"
  9. Tuccy

    Battle of the Espero Convoy

    First surface engagement between the Italian and Allied units in WWII - a small convoy of Italian destroyers carrying antitank units to Africa was intercepted by the 7th Cruiser Squadron. Order of battle: 7th Cruiser Squadron (VAdm John Tovey) 1st Cruiser Division HMS Orion (flagship) HMS Neptune HMAS Sydney HMS Gloucester 2nd Cruiser Division HMS Manchester HMS Gloucester 2nd Destroyer Squadron (Capitano di Fregata Enrico Baroni) Espero (flagship) - Sunk Ostro Zeffiro Result: Allied victory - Espero sunk On the flip side, remaining destroyers escaped and ammunition consumption halted cruiser squadron activities for some time, leading to delays in convoys to Malta.
  10. 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?
  11. Lupin_sansei

    Fanmade Carrier Splitt (CV and CVE/CVL)

    Hi all My friend Seefelder and i were thinking about the Carrier gamplay and came up with an idea, to split the Carriers in two new groups: light/escort Carrier and Carriers. This fanmade gameplay will come up with 3 full sets of CV / CVE/CVL Techtrees. USN, IJN and Royal Navy. The Gamplay would be like this: Light/escort would take the lead as supporter and hunter, while the Carrier would mainly strike. This means light/escort Carrier would have more fighters then the Carrier. The fightersquadron on Carriers will be reduced to 1 group. Airsplane configuration Light/escort: 2 to 3 fighters and 1 to 2 dive bombers/torpedo bomber (depending of its tier) Carrier: 1 fighter, 1-3 dive bombers and 1-3 torpedo bombers (depending on its tier) Techtree USN US CV Splitt (CV and CVE/CVL) Ship tier Tier IV Tier V Tier VI Tier VII Tier VIII Tier IX Tier X Ship Name Long Island Charger Casablanca Sangamon Commencment Bay Independence Wright Note CVE-1 CVE-30 CVE-56 CVE-26 CVE-105 / AP-Bombs Uptiered CVL-22 / AP-Bombs CVL-49 / Saipan Class / AP-Bombs Configuration 2/1/0 2/1/0 2/1/0 2/1/1 2/1/1 2/1/1 3/1/1 Hangar 26 28 (Original 30) 30 (Original 28) 32 34 36 (Original 33) 42 Ship Name Langley Bouge Ranger Lexington Wasp Essex Midway Note Downtiered Downtiered New Configuration 1/1/1 1/1/1 1/2/1 1/2/2 1/2/2 1/3/2 1/3/3 Hangar 26 33 76 78 95 100 137 IJN IJN CV Splitt (CV and CVE/CVL) Ship tier Tier IV Tier V Tier VI Tier VII Tier VIII Tier IX Tier X Ship Name Hosho Zuiho Chitose Shinyo Ryuho Ryujo G18 (Ryusho) Note Techtree Change Techtree Change CVL CVE 1943 as Build CVL Uptiered CVL Project CVL Configuration 2/1/1 2/0/2 2/1/2 2/1/2 2/1/2 3/1/2 3/1/2 Hangar 24 30 30 33 36 48 48 (Project 42) Ship Name Taiyo Hiyo Hiryu Unryu Shokaku Taiho Hakuryu Note New CVE New and to balance Downtiered New Configuration 1/1/2 1/2/2 1/2/2 1/2/2 1/2/3 1/3/3 1/3/3 Hangar 30 (Original 27) 40 (Original 54) 73 75 (Original 73) 84 90 (Original 82) 100 Royal Navy RN CV Splitt (CV and CVE/CVL) Ship tier Tier IV Tier V Tier VI Tier VII Tier VIII Tier IX Tier X Ship Name Argus Hermes Unicorn Furious Majestic Centaur Colossus Note New and to balance New and to balance Configuration 2/0/1 2/0/1 2/1/1 2/1/1 2/1/1 3/1/1 3/1/2 Hangar 22 (Original 18) 25 (Original 20) 33 36 37 42 48 Ship Name Eagle Courageous Audacious Illustrious Arc Royal Implacable Malta Note New and to balance Configuration 1/1/1 1/1/2 1/1/2 1/2/2 1/2/2 1/2/3 1/3/3 Hangar 30 42 (Original 48) 60 65 (Original 55) 72 81 108 What do you think about it.
  12. HalSteiner

    HMS Gallant

    Opinions, opinions. Anyone got one already? What are your thoughts on the ship? Viable for ranked/random/operations? Pros and cons?
  13. ghostbuster_no2

    Mittelfristige Ziele Stufe V und VI

    Hey Leute, ich brauche mal eure Hilfe. Ich habe mir die Tage WoWs mal wieder runtergeladen (nach 3 Jahren), weil WoT grad meh ist. Habe von damalsTM noch Phoenix, Wyoming, Clemson, Isokaze und Kuma in der Garage im Dock und mir jetzt noch einen Briten zugelegt. Vorerst soll WoWs nur für nebenbei sein, außerdem kenne ich von WoT ja die Lernkurve. Was ich gerne erspielen würde im Bereich Stufe V oder VI: zwei Kreuzer mit guter AA und schnell schießenden Kanonen, Torps kein Muss --> also US oder UK? ein zweites BB neben den Amis, idealerweise wendiger als die Wyoming ein oder zwei DD - hier fehlt mir noch die Erfahrung, um einzuschätzen, was mir wirklich liegt Danke für euren Input! ps: Ja, ich bin faul, ich könnte mir das auch selbst zusammensuchen, aber ich hab schon genug Zeit in WoT investiert.
  14. TheNamelessLegend

    Nerf Royal Navy High Explosive

    As the name of this thread implies. RN high explosive, especially on battleships, needs to be nerfed majorly.
  15. List of views, problems, and other miscellany on the RN Battleships: - It took me long enough, but I felt it worthwhile to write up this much on the RN BBs, and my general thoughts on them. It’s been about 2 months since their release, I really did take my time (well, part of that is me being a bit lazy). There is going to be quite a lot of mildly miffed language however, since WG really has not done that good of a job with them to me, and from the numerous forum threads and posts, I get the same impression from the community as a whole. Hence, while it is meant to be relatively neutral, my writing will imply that I am one of the disgusted of Tunbridge Wells. (I probably am to be honest, being a Man of Kent). The changes described below are in my view, potentially what would make the line a better representative of the RN BBs historically, as well as fixing several gameplay issues that they have, being UP, OP, or just not satisfying. This thread is about the regular RN BB line, and not Nelson or Duke of York, which I sincerely hope doesn’t get through testing in any form as it is now. I can leave those for future threads. Bellerophon (Billy Ruffian): - This ship sits on the fence between OP & Very good. She doesn’t really have any disadvantages, but can still be outperformed by the totally not tier 4 Albert. She has a long turret traverse, but her armour is reliable enough, the guns themselves are excellent, the seconadaries are not bad, the maneuverability is good, and the ship just doesn’t do much wrong. - However, to be on the safe side, I would suggest a nerf to the firing range, down to about 12.5 to 13.5km, forcing Bellerophon to get closer instead of staying at long range. The ¼ pen HE is also quite unnecessary at this tier, you have no problems slicing targets open with AP. Another option could be to reduce the ship to her nominal top speed of 21kn, and not a trials/overload speed of 22.5kn. No practical difference, but Bellerophon would be a bit more on par with other tier 3s if this was the case. - While the A-hull seems an accurate representation of HMS Bellerophon or one of her sisters. The B-hull is unnecessarily ahistorical. Bellerophon has the best AA at tier 3 for a BB, but this comes with an ahistorical upgrade if I am correct in my knowledge. The Single 40mm MGs mounted on the turret roofs shouldn’t be there, and were never there historically. For a ship that does nothing too badly, losing the AA goes some way to reducing how good the ship is, while also making it truer to history. In fact, the only BBs to use the single 40mm MGs was NelRod as originally built. This is wrong. Boo. - Oh, and just a small note, it probably would be more appropriate that the description for Bellerophon says developed from the famous ‘HMS Dreadnought’ instead of ‘Dreadnought class’, because well, who calls it the Dreadnought class, class of one? Orion (The Great Hunter): - Overpowered Orion is Overpowered, and there is no way around that. Despite having a 72s 180 turret traverse time and no good turning circle or rudder shift to make up for it, Orion has many, many good attributes to make up for it. Excellent HE that ruins all it touches. Very powerful AP for the tier, being quite adept at slicing open opponent BBs. Standard speed, good AA, again, the ship has no tangible disadvantages to take away from the awesome firepower. - Nerfing Orion could be done by decreasing the range from 16.7km to 14-5km or so, forcing Orions to get closer. Speed like Bellerophon can be cropped from 22kn to 21kn. ¼ HE pen can definitely be removed, it is really not necessary on this ship. The turret arc of the Q turret (amidships) can be made worse (explained below). Maybe this would be enough, though Orion would still be a dominant force on the seas. Rate of Fire is also another option, albeit one that I would think is best left until after other nerfs if it is needed. - Orion has no historical hull. However much she looks similar to herself (unlike the German BBs), Orion or any of her 3 sisters (Monarch, Conqueror & Thunderer) are not represented in game as they were at any point in their service careers. I understand that they would need an ahistorical hull to upgrade the AA on the ships if they had survived post Washington Naval Treaty, but this should only come into play with the B/C-hull. - Assuming the A-hull is to be a historical rendition of Orion the following should happen at least: 1. Director on the main mast replaced with the usual spotting top, as seen with Bellerophon. That director looks silly perched up there anyway. With Hood and co, it is down by the conning tower. 2. The 120mm DP secondaries are removed completely. As are the 40mm MGs on the turret roofs. Both are additions you can use for a B-hull. If need be, make the current B-hull a C-hull for extra AA. In return, Orion only gets 1 or 2 76mm or 102mm AA guns. If Arkansas & the stock Myogi can manage with no AA, you can too. It’s not like those non-manual dropping tier 4 and 5 carriers can [edited] you as badly anymore. Left, Monarch in 1919, Right is Conqueror in 1918. Just to give some views of an A or B-hull. It would be safe to say that these ships looked quite imposing, as the first super-dreadnoughts. 3. The ships boats and superstructure would be slightly edited, as the side view below shows. Note that the boats that would restrict the firing arcs of Q-turret. This would mean that Orion would have to expose more of her broadside to fire the turret, or alternatively keep 20% of her firepower out of the fight. Hopefully this ‘nerf’ would be carried through to the B/C-hull as well with a modernisation. Orion in WW1 condition. Probably 1915/6 if I had to guess. This illustrates nicely what an A-hull could look like. And also shows the ships boats which would reduce the arcs of Q-turret. Call it New York syndrome or something. - As for the rebuilt B/C-hull the ship: 1. A rebuilt superstructure which moves the fore funnel further aft and incorporates the fire control director could be used. If not, leave the superstructure as is, though maybe still move the fore funnel aft of the mast, and move the director to the base of the superstructure. 2. Keep the 102mm secondaries and AA suite, however, personally I would recommend some Oerlikons/ Quad Vickers 12.7mm on the turret roof in mounts as seen on QE/Warspite, not the 40mm MGs, which seem a bit unlikely to be mounted like that. Iron Duke (Tin Duck): - The Duke is a decently balanced ship. A moderate upgrade on Orion, being more fleshed out in soft stats. Sees tier 7s, but the powerful HE can deal with them. She is quite strong, as she inherits the firepower of Orion, but with slightly better range, speed, HP etc. - I wouldn’t really suggest any changes to Iron Duke. The 72s turret traverse is quite annoying without a good turning circle or rudder shift, so maybe that could be improved for quality of life, but then New York becomes even more irrelevant. The speed could be better at 23kn, but that is more about consistency than anything else. Perhaps you could peg her range back to 16.3km as per Warspite. - As with Orion, Iron Duke gets no historical hull. This is not unprecedented (Hello Konig my old friend…), but it is annoying nonetheless. Especially if I want to feel like I am CinC at Jutland. While a stock tier 4 Iron Duke sister is a possible premium, the RN has enough premium potentials at any tier. So, assuming the A-hull is going to be the historical one; 1. 102mm DP secondaries removed. Who needs some silly DP guns in WW1 anyway? 2. The single funnel as of current is replaced by the historical two funnel layout. This also means the two large cranes behind said single funnel have to push off. 3. All the AA is taken off, and replaced with just 2 76mm AA guns. It is not like stock Konig & New York are that much better in practical terms. And the B-hull should be inexpensive anyway. Suffer comparatively little, you will. And if WG are right somehow and it makes the ship really annoying to play, despite it being about 2-3 games to unlock, you could just buff the values of the 76mm guns themselves. Other aspects of the ship are more likely to make the ship an unwelcome experience, like rudder shift, rather than the lack of credible AA. 4. Those more modern fire directors would also have to hop it. Yes, that means you, director sitting on the spotting top. A large spotting top it is me lad, no more, no less. Hmm, it is another one of these handy side on views. This one shows HMS Emperor of India, the only one of the 4 Iron Dukes to not have the sternwalk, as Iron Duke has in game. Either way, as with Orion, how a historically accurate Iron Duke A-hull could look. Pretty. Now where is the High Seas Fleet, I need to send 343mm blockade diplomacy. - Oh, and the rebuilt hull Iron Duke does have? Well it has a few problems. Like the Octuple pompoms on B & X turret roofs. Considering the 15” armed R class Battleships could only manage a quad pompom on the turret roof, Iron Duke should have no more than that too. Stick the Octuple pompoms somewhere in the superstructure if you want them so badly. The strait single funnel indicates that the ship has had her boilers rebuilt, and hence a speed of 23kn would be appropriate for a rebuilt ship. Konig has managed to boost herself to 24kn afterall, the rebuilt opposing flagship of Jutland can’t be left too far behind the other rebuilt flagship of Jutland. A poor image, but I couldn’t be arsed to find a better one after 30 minutes of web surfing/trawling. HMS Resolution in 1942, showing that even with a larger twin 15” turret, a quad 40mm pompom was carried. Iron Duke in game is on the right, and that octuple pompom is precariously perched on the turret. It doesn’t look that stable. Scaffolding much. Queen Elizabeth (Big Lizzie): - QE is probably the worst ship tier for tier in the line. She is not terrible per se, but aside from her very good AA power for tier 6, there is no reason to play her if you have a Warspite, unless you like the ship personally, or are an HE spamming spud taking advantage of the ¼ HE. - Most of why QE is worse than Warspite is that Warspite has faster turning turrets, combined with a very tight turning circle, while getting better secondaries. This makes Warspite a lot more flexible at dishing out damage, while QE gets fairly minor advantages in return. A bit more HP, a bit more range, slightly better turret angles. - Improvements to QE could include a better rudder shift time, from 14.3s to 12-13s, beating Warspite’s 14.2s. Another way would be to reduce the turret turn time from 72s for 180 degrees, to around 65s. Still worse than Warspite, but not massively worse so the ship is awkward and inflexible to play. Fairly minor things like this, but it gives QE more of a point without detracting from Warspite. - Queen Elizabeth is represented in her as rebuilt form, which does have a historical B-hull. A-hull is almost there, but should possess no 20mm Oerlikons, or fewer than 8 of them. However, I will express disappointment that there is no 1930s condition Queen Elizabeth. Not asking for a 1916 condition QE with just 4x 76mm AA guns, though it would be nice to go with Bayern’s A-hull. However, a post 1935 QE would have 4x 102mm AA guns, and 2 Octuple pompom mounts, sufficient enough for an A-hull, if Bayern is anything to go by. Said A-hull would require QE in a semi-modernised state, with trunked funnels and WW1 style bridge structure. It would be a weak AA suite, but oh well. If you want a bit more AA, you could use 1934 Barham, with the addition of 2x 4 12.7mm MGs, and a catapult. Or 1936 Malaya, which has 4x 2 102mm and 4x 4 12.7mm. There are options afterall. Queen Elizabeth, 1936. Sexy trunked funnels. The ships motto, ‘Semper Eadem’, “always the same” doesn’t exactly fit with the ships appearances, which changed drastically 3 times. - Of note is also that a late war condition QE is a possible C-hull. Giving up the catapult for 16 more dual Oerlikons. Worth it? Probably not, the increase in short range AA is not that good a trade. But it is something to mention as a possibility for those who are frequently abused by carriers and have PTSD of it. King George V (KGV – You think of a better nickname then): - Alright, I’ll get the first one out of the way, the ship should be a tier 8 as it was originally intended to be in development. Some *virtually coughs* may disagree, but I have the feeling aside from the die-hard KGV T7 crowd, no one will mind too much. Tier 8 would basically benefit the ship and line as a whole anyway. - Gameplay-wise, the ship is very split. When RNG rolls for you, the ship is an insane fire-starting monster with alright AP (it does the job, no more, no less). It can be considered OP in this respect, a beefed up Scharnhorst which is not as adept at brawling. On the other hand, if RNG decides that it is not your day, the ship is incredibly frustrating. Not especially reliable accuracy, and relying on the 41% fire chance is a double roll of the dice, and makes for a rage inducing experience at times. Very much unsatisfying. Furthermore, the 25mm bow and deck make a well armoured BB incredibly vulnerable, and even more frustrating to play. A ship with so much potential given a 25s reload and alike, but sabotaged by RNG rolls and 25mm plating. In theory this makes a balanced tier 7, but it is unsatisfying to play at times, and feels very contradictory. - So what would I do? If the ship is to stay at tier 7 (which would annoy me to no ends), I would not mind seeing the deck armour buffed a bit to 32mm at least, and preferably more to resist incoming fire better at the expense of the silly-good concealment value. However, that is optional, and fits better as a tier 8 (I’ll get to it). The other thing would be giving the ship 2.0 sigma and better accuracy, but reducing the reload to 28-30s, making the ship more reliable, and less spray and pray. The reload is a big attraction, but from a personal view, I would like a more consistent ship. More battleship, less heavy cruiser. - If the ship is to be made tier 8 (Eat it T7 shitlords! – ahem, sorry) then the access to the concealment module and 32mm bow and deck armour would definitely help, however, the ship would also have to have it’s present tier 7 stats buffed up. The 18km range made something above 19km, the speed made 28.5kn and the anaemic stock values made more bearable. The catapult is to be sacrificed on the altar of better AA of a late war fit KGV or sister. The HP should be increased to circa 64,500HP, more in line with the displacement of a late war Howe or Anson. The regular KGV represents the class afterall, a la Lexington/Saratoga. The 2.0 sigma is put into the mix to make the ship a consistent force to contend with, so the ship can put out reliable hits like North Carolina. Rudder shift may also be an area for improvement to get that rear turret unmasked quicker. Say from 15s to 14s. But that is not necessary, and could just increase power creep. Now about, the deck armour, this is a better change from this tier up. KGV being at this tier eliminates the 25mm problem (the replacement tier 7 should not be in the gimmicky concept that WG have for the tiers 7 to 10 currently), and pushing above the standard 32mm makes the deck resistant to 6” IFHE fire, and I feel that this advantage is worth sacrificing 1-2km of concealment for. I will justify this more later on in the post, but suffice to say, this should apply for tiers 7/8, 9 and 10 as well. And Heck, if you T8 KGV doubters are still unconvinced, then we can throw in the RN HP as found on Lion & Conq. Would make logical sense *if* the ship was UP and only a tier down from Lion. But it shouldn’t come to that, given KGV has enough good attributes anyway to make her perform at tier 8. The tier 7 spot can be taken by a post QE design, sort of a midway between Hood and QE. It would fit better, and still be more realistic than Monarch, but that is getting ahead of myself. - Historically, the KGV we have now is not exactly accurate either. The A-hull should only have a single quadruple 40mm pompom. Not the 2 that you see in the bridge wings in game. And the B-hull is worse, as KGV/Duke of York has managed to transcend time and space and receive various AA upgrades without losing her catapult and previous AA. There are plenty of combinations for accurate A and B-hulls keeping the catapult if you want a tier 7 KGV. Two of which is below: King George V: 1941/1942 8x 2 134mm 5x 8 40mm pompoms 1x 4 40mm pompoms 18x 1 20mm Oerlikons Duke of York: 1942 8x 2 134mm 6x 8 40mm pompoms 28x 20mm Oerlikons As for a tier 8 KGV, WG had modelled a late war condition Duke of York in anticipation of this before their plans changed, so that can be revitalised if Anson or Howe are not to be used. There are also other ways a tier 8 KGV can be balanced, but they need not be mentioned yet. Alternatively, WG could use said old tier 8 KGV hull as a [edited] Duke of York T7 premium, which nobody really wants, and from the stats, is not getting a good reception. Forza King George V! Well, Long live the King, glory to him etc. etc. – While I am looking for responses to this thread, I would prefer them not to get stuck in the quagmire that is the KGV tiering debate, and I know where I stand on that, and that is not changing. If you must, say what/why the ship should be where, or if it was, it would require, but I don’t want the historical arguments here, over whether the ship deserves to be tier 8, it would just get messy and I have no time to deal with... well, I described ‘them’ as ‘shitlords’ earlier, so you get the idea. :) That debate is null as far as this thread is concerned, I think it should be a tier 8, and I have focused my thread accordingly. Monarch (Mongrel /Scrapheap Challenge /Fake abomination): An accurate depiction of Trainspite when he saw Monarch for the first time after it had shed the KGV clone skin it had when first making an appearance, 2017, colourised. - Well, I spend a lot of time talking about this thing, and I don’t necessarily enjoy it. In my view, it is the epitome of failure of the RN BB line. Mainly because it is completely fake, but also because I found it quite underwhelming gameplay-wise too. From KGV, there is a lot to look forward to in some aspects, 25s reload with 15” guns looks very nice on paper, but the only advantages I noticed were the overmatch abilities and the faster shell flight times, at expense of the HE fire chance. And WG have been lazy enough to copy paste a lot of the stats that ideally should improve with tier 8 over from KGV, the range, the HP, the maneuverability, and suffice to say, the lack of range is a significant annoyance at times, given I would consider 19km to be the benchmark, though other 22km to be excessive. - So, if the ship was to stay, which I sincerely hope it doesn’t (at least in this form), but I would suggest a few changes unless the ship was to wallow in mediocrity (It is distinctly meh – probably the weakest tier 8 BB), I would buff the deck armour at the expense of concealment as detailed above in the KGV section, and I would possibly give Monarch the super heal. This would be in addition to the range buff to 19.5km as with KGV above, the 28.5kn speed as above with KGV, possibly a better rudder shift too. As right now the only distinct advantages I see that Monarch has over KGV are the 32mm ends, short range AA and overmatch. Everything else is a lazy half arsed clone with tier 7.5 stats. - Alright, the historical part. Well, since the ship is fiction, it is going to be a load of writing on why Monarch is just wrong. (Wrong sir, wrong! You lose! Good day sir! – The standard response to when someone tries to say Monarch has a historical design) This ship was announced after the rest of the RN BBs, presumably as it was a latecomer to the line and development schedule, enough to delay it behind the -rest, probably making the model for it. The Design which WG purport Monarch to be is Design 15C, a KGV preliminary from circa October 1935, which used 9x 15", 20x 4.5", 35,000t and was 225.6m long at the waterline. Design 15C, a KGV preliminary using 9x 15”/45 guns. Her secondaries and hull length are the main differences from the final KGV other than her armament. Credit where it is due to the shipbucketers who created this. I like using these side on views if you may have noticed by now, they be good visualisation. Monarch on the other hand is a KGV hull, with 227.2m in length, with Nelson turrets strapped onto it. WG also decided to add a load of bofors in a very hopeful late war AA outfit, and added a lattice mast that no RN BB ever got. Quite contradictory given WG also say Monarch is from 1945, yet the later Vanguard has no lattice mast. With the above, the only part of 15C that exists in Monarch is the 15"/45 Mk.II guns, which don't require any modelling effort, given it is just a data set. Everything else is made up by WG, and hence is just as fake as the other made up ships (around certain criteria) - Kurfurst, Roon, Hindenberg, Henri quatre & Conqueror. If not, more fake given it is a Frankenstein of parts, rather than a ship designed around something like the aforementioned Germans and their turrets. The best case scenario for Monarch is that it is an evolved version of Design 15C, which grew in length to KGV's size, and received the 5.25" secondaries in development, and then had a major refit in 1945. Which is awfully specific, given most if not all the other designs in game keep the original specifications of the design to an extent. Kii for example is 250m long in game, which was how long Kii was going to be. Lion in game is the correct length for the 1938 Design of Lion, despite being upgraded and lengthened in following designs. The secondaries don't have to be changed, given the 4.5" is a better AA weapon than the 5.25" in game. 15C would should keep them anyway, given the design was ditched before the 5.25" gun was adopted. And even this doesn't justify the lattice mast, inexplicably using Nelson style turrets instead of KGV/Lion ones, and the very optimistic AA build. Because in the end, trying to justify a lazy copy-paste hull with turrets that was created because WG did not want Nelson in the line is pointless. I suspect that WG chose the name Monarch in part because the ship is a fake, and therefore can get a 'fake' name (One not suitable for a KGV class, named after recent Monarchs, and traditional/recent Admiral names). But basically, Monarch is a complete fake/fictional ship, a half-arsed effort based on a change of mind some time before the RN BBs were first announced, but significantly later than the initial start of development on them. I still wouldn’t be satisfied even with an accurate Design 15C because of where KGV is, but at least it would be relatively accurate as a design, and not add as much salt into the wound. In an ideal world, I would switch Monarch out to a tier 8 premium, or banish it to purgatory never to return. *insert gif of triggered Trainspite here – don’t worry I already have one* Lion (Sea Kitty): - Lion is a very good ship. Almost too good. Arguably too good. In my eyes, she is the pinnacle of the line. Good punch with AP and HE, great concealment, good maneuverability and an RN HP repair, with acceptable other aspects. So while I would like to see the ship untouched, it should probably be toned down a notch. The nerf to the HP repair forces the ship to play more passively so the cat can stay back and lick it’s wounds, which is a fancy way of saying letting the cooldown timer tick until the ship has enough HP to confidently stride forward and push again. It is not the change I would have made to the ship, since passive play is not something I would promote in this ship. Lion is very flexible right now, a ship that can do a lot, hit hard, dodge reasonably well, swat planes, engage a cloaking device, and influence the game with her speed. I don’t want that to change, but the ship could take a better nerf than the HP repair cooldown. Like losing the ¼ HE pen, or the already mentioned trade off of deck armour for concealment. I would rate the concealment better than the deck armour, so it is an overall nerf, but one that should make the ships a bit more normalised in gameplay. A little less flexible, but not overly so, and they could still retain best in class concealment, while being more resistant to incoming fire from 152mm IFHE and 203mm HE. - The nerf WG applied to the ship, increasing the recharge time of the ‘super heal’ does make the ship less effective, but it also makes the ship play more passively as the ship hangs around waiting for the ability to push effectively again, which is surely not intended. I would recommend undoing this nerf, as I feel other aspects of the ship are more of a factor in making the ship overpowered. One option would be to completely remove the ahistorical 419mm gun option. This should reduce the potency of Lion’s guns a bit. - Historically wise, this is WG’s rendition of a modernised HMS Lion to the 1938 design standards, had she actually made it off the slipway. However, there are a few parts of the model that do not stand up to how a completed Lion would look. Mr3awsome goes over them in his thread about analysing the statistic cards for the RN BBs, including the Lion. The thread is below, and is a good read. Go on, you know you want to. Even if you have already seen it, as the emperor would say, do it. EU: https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/81328-a-detailed-look-at-the-released-british-bb-cards/ NA: https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/128013-a-detailed-look-at-the-released-british-bb-cards/ The short version, is that the placement of the AA is iffy, the choice of AA is also against RN practice, the speed is 0.5kn too low and contradicts WGs usual practice for paper ships, and the main fire control director is not on the aft superstructure, as the 1938 design would have had. Another thing to note is that the ship wouldn’t get 419mm guns. Simply renaming them to 406mm with improved stats would be more believable. - However, a bigger concern I have is the name of the ship. Lion, for Lion class battleship. However, since it is apparently impossible to have two ships of the same name in the game client, this tier 9 BB ‘Lion’ blocks out the far more famous HMS Lion, a WW1 era Battlecruiser, flagship of Admiral Beatty during the battles of Heligoland Bight, Dogger Bank & Jutland. The fighting cat, that used it’s claws to scratch at the Kaiser’s ships. This famous ship would never appear in game unless the name for the T9 is changed. Sure, her less famous sister Princess Royal could appear in lieu, but that is not an elegant option, given a real ship should take precedence over one that never touched water for a name. Imagine if WG used the names Iowa or North Carolina for the never completed South Dakota class from 1920, and used a less famous sister ship for the more historically significant class of ships. Now admittedly the sister ships of Iowa & N.Cal are quite famous in themselves, but hopefully the point is clear that it would be quite an unpopular move, against what WG have done most of the time thusfar (emphasis on the most - WG are inconsistent when it suits them). The name Temeraire though is a suitable candidate for the tier 9 BB. Not only was the second ship of the Lion class BBs also laid down, the name doesn’t conflict with ships suitable to be represented in the game, as the lead ship Bellerophon represents the Bellerophon class Battleship Temeraire. And also the name has a nice ring to it. Evoking the spirit of Trafalgar, the fighting Temeraire should live again! A painting by Lionel Wyllie, depicting the wounded and listing HMS Lion in the firth of Forth in the shadow of the Forth Railway Bridge, after the battle of Dogger Bank. This grand veteran of the dreadnought era would never see representation in the game worthy of the famed ship she is if the current tier 9 Lion keeps her name. Turning a blind eye to the historical ships that have inspired this game perhaps? Conqueror (Coloniser /Also something fake): - *sigh*. And we get to this one. It is half broken, half not, and could definitely be better balanced. I wasn’t as impressed by this ship as Lion, hence I don’t regard the ship as straight out OP, like Orion, but the ship has a ‘toxic’ gameplay at times which is very undesirable. HE spamming is rife in this line, but this ship is the pinnacle of it. It is not that the AP is bad, it is pretty good, but the HE just does so much more reliable damage. So for starters, I would kick out the ¼ HE pen, and consider removing the option for the 419mm guns altogether. The ship was designed by WG around the 457mm, and the 419s were grafted on during development, and the spam of 12 rifles of almost 50% fire chance outweighs the more finesse driven style of the 457s, even if they have an even more insane fire chance. - Without the 419s and the ¼ HE penetration, the ship should use the hard hitting 457mm AP more often, using the good accuracy inflict pain, without resorting to mindless HE spamming. This would hopefully fix the toxic gameplay of the ship, but I would also recommend making the ship more normalised. This means dropping the crazy good concealment by 0.5km to 1km, and buffing the 32mm deck so the ship is more resistant to 203mm HE and 152mm IFHE rounds. A more vulnerable tier 10 BB with 32mm deck armour can be saved for a BB line that suits it more. Like an RN BC line, which evolves into fast BBs, but can keep BC traits. Conqueror itself should be more tough in my opinion, more tough, more battleship, less heavy cruiser. Just because the ship seems to be normalising in terms of player statistics doesn’t mean the ship doesn’t have problems and can be left alone, the ship creates problems in it’s gameplay, it is not exactly suitable to keep it that way. - When first teased, this ship was reported to be the BB design L2, a 1920 design for a ship armed with 8 457mm guns, with a heavily angled 381mm armour belt, trundling along at 25kn. Even accounting for refitted statistics for L2, it became apparent that the only part of L2 that existed in Conqueror was the 457mm guns, much like how the only part of the design Monarch wishes it could be is the 381mm guns. Indeed, upon release, the Conqueror was described as a ‘British Yamato’ and therefore the ship is more akin to what if the Royal Navy had built a new BB around older 457mm guns instead of 381mm ones that resulted in Vanguard. 18” armed Vanguard what if is therefore not a bad description of Conqueror, which uses a name for the 3rd Lion class BB, but it doesn’t take away from the ship being completely made up by WG. It does fit a little better progression wise than the existing tier 10 worthy designs, which is why I would not banish it from the game as I would with Monarch, but I would add an alternative tier 10 RN BB also unlockable from Lion into the mix. Overall views and changes: (Or, how to not create a line that fires so much HE that the global climate becomes akin to Venus’) So overall changes for the line. Not ship specific, but addressing the line itself. The ships often fire far too much HE ammunition because they have an excellent combination of a good fire chance, and ¼ pen on the HE rounds, meaning a lot more regular penetration damage. The German BBs got away with the ¼ pen on the HE because the HE is relatively poor in comparison to other BB HE without it, but the RN BBs already have a unique bonus in the high fire chance, so a combination of both pen and fire is unnecessary for a balanced ship, especially when the AP throughout the line is not bad at all. Therefore I would remove the ¼ HE pen from the entire line, and possibly revert the AP to normal fusing times to make the ships a bit better at slapping citadels into BBs, though the latter part is not necessary. Furthermore, as a blow to cruisers, these BBs, especially from tier 7 to 10 can just engage a 10km cloaking device, which is not especially good given that if an RN BB happens to have AP loaded, it can outspot some cruisers, which is quite silly, given cruisers can have a hard enough time already just avoiding long range fire from BBs, let alone a BB disengaging it’s imported Romulan cloacking device to unleash hell at close range. Hence I would increase the concealment for the tiers 7 to 10 ships by at least 0.5km, and closer to 1-2km so they are on par with or slightly above the USN ships at the respective tier. Still an advantage, just not so harsh on crusiers. There are better ships to have this level of concealment, like BCs, which can find their own unique place, and are meant to make life hard for cruisers, The nerf to concealment can be made up for by buffing the deck armour of the tier 8 to 10 (assuming KGV is tier 8, the tier 7 replacement already has the decent armour of QE), from 32mm to 35mm+ so the ships are not so fragile. Play them like Battleships, use that HP repair to be aggressive. There is no reason for the high tiers to have the gameplay they do when they can actually follow on from their previous tiers, and have their own style at the same time. These ships are easy to balance, even the contentious KGV can be made to work with little trouble, but WG has made it hard and awkward by forcing gimmicks onto the ships when they were not needed. The radar, hydro and defensive AA may have been removed, but the less visible gimmicks remained, and that is simply not needed for a line that can provide it’s own quirks regardless. High fire chance, poor long range AA at the higher tiers, decent concealment, sturdy armour all set the line apart from other BBs, as well as consisting of famed British ships. Well, mostly. Yes Monarch, go back to the shadow zone, no one likes you (and those who do will be colonised if they reveal themselves). List of recommended changes: A list that cuts the explanation and wibble of my talking. For those that don’t like reading. So, if you have made it through the wall of text, congratulations, how do you think I did? Good solutions, that WG should definitely include, utter trash being spouted by an arch-teapot (teaboo is a danger word for me. Same as a certain B-word), or do these ideas need some refining to make the RN BB line overall more enjoyable, fun or pleasant to be in the game? I am debating whether or not to start a poll for the more challenged by 7,000 word monologues, over what ideas are popular, but I will leave it for now, hopefully people can pick up the main points. If someone wants to post it on reddit or something, you can, because I can’t be arsed to. For now, this suspiciously dapper black bear invites you to discuss. And who I am I to argue with him. That there is quite a nice hat. I want one.
  16. Heya all After waiting an utter eternity for the patch to download yesterday i booted up the system and took out British Cruisers into the game and had two games in my Minotaur and a game in the Fiji to test out the new smoke changes. Sadly in both the Minotaur games i was cursed with the worst CV's know to man and both came dead last in the team XP as they both tried to go sniping rather then actually helping the team, and even failed at that, but that is RNG just hating me as i also lost the Fiji game but managed to get double the XP of the next person on my team and 3rd highest overall thanks to 4 kills, confederate and 120k damage. So the smoke change experience. Its not the end of the world, DD's are still terrified to get too close to the smoke and an RN destroyer in general, i had a benson try and spot me in my smoke towards the end of the second game in the Minotaur, at that point the game was already lost so i wasn't too caring wise and promptly deleted him in 4 salvo's and by that point i could see the game was lost so it was a case of doing as much damage as possible, i was spotted in the smoke but then seconds later i was radared. The Fiji game i really did not see much difference the only changes was when i was spotted and attacked by a pair of Queen Elizabeths towards the end of the game and i was just trying to farm as much damage as possible. the only other time i was spotted in my smoke was by a DD that pushed in range and he was also then spotted and took 10k damage before retreating behind his own smoke screen and i disappeared off contact. either way early impression is that it has not made that much of a difference and if you are within 5.5km of the front lines you have over extended and time to fall back, hydro helps but its not 100% whats everyone else's experience so far
  17. jerkchicken

    Des Moines VS Minotaur

    I was wondering wich line is going to be next for me, so i wanted to play CL more cuz most of the time i play BB/DD and somethimes CV. Not that i play CL but i played it less. So lets make a straight line, IJN: Tanky, Strong HE/AP, Fires, Concealment pretty good, long reload, nice Guns, Great Arc's. USN: Less tanky(overmatch belt), Very strong AP at everything and HE also good. Consealment is OK, Short reload, nice Guns, High Arc's. USSR: Most tanky when angled, Very strong AP at every range and everything HE is very strong and much fires, Consealment F*king worse, Ok reload, Big Guns, Fastest Arc in the game. KM(germany): Tanky and most troll as all, Very strong AP if broadsite, HE ok, Consealment also OK, Nice reload (DPM), nice Guns, Great Arc's. RN: Paper armor, Strong AP and everything, Consealment is good, Best reload in the game for a CL, (best DMP), OK Guns, High Arc's. France Navy: Paper but trolly flat armor, very Strong AP and HE, Consealement is mwa to me, OK/long reload, BigBig Guns, Ok arc's (not the best) Soooo, i was considering for going these lines and choose one. 1. USN: (at T6 right now) des moines 2. USSR: (at T8 right now) moskva 3. KM(germany): (at T3 right now xd) hindenburg 4. RN: (at T7 right now) minotaur Which one you liked the most of these four T10's? The Des Moines, Moskva, Hindenburg or Minotaur? If i was wrong here and there improve me :p Thank you for your time, Varenity (SPQR)
  18. ReapingKnight

    RN Prem Light Cruiser?

    Hi all, I've recently been think that since I hit the Neptune that I'd like to keep it and train another captain for the Minotaur but the Belfast doesn't seem that suited...don't get me wrong I think it's pretty good (as I am less than skilled, it's not OP in my hands) but the captain build isn't nearly as transferable...Are there any plans for a RN Cruiser like the current line in development? It just seems a little odd to add a Cruiser that has HE to train captains for a cruiser line that can't use HE...it just means you can't use a captain to their max potential unless you're willing to pay to change skills every time you want to use the Belfast or have a perm Belfast captain. Any clues? Cheers
  19. Mikhail__

    RN best BB line

    Please WG dont force your vision to put Vanguard as T VIII Premium. It just doesent fit and ruins the line. There is only one way to make this line correct: VI: Nelson VII: KGV / Prince of Wales (premium) VIII: Vanguard IX: Lion X: Conqueror So do it correctly.
  20. kreigselosteus

    royal navy cruiser seaplanes

    There are multiple rn cruisers which should have planes and already have the catapults modelled. E.g. Emerald has a catapult but not the fairey seafox to go with it. Should they get them?
  21. Sooo, we all know the story, In order to make the Royal Navy Cruisers 'different' (whether that's a negative of positive aspect is your own opinion) Wargaming in its divine stupidity wisdom released British ships equipped in game with a 'improved' version of Armour Piercing ammunition at the cost of its High Explosive ammunition. this Semi Armour Piercing supposedly has better penetration and a smaller chance of shell bounce allowing for more consistent damage against targets than regular 7" AP shells. A (I can already hear the groan of the forums' domesticated martian ) pointed out the advantages of the new skill perk 'Inertia Fuses for High Explosive shells' (IFHE... what I keep calling HEAP) which increases the penetration of HE shells at the cost of fire chance (and a reduction that can be nearly fully negated though clever perk selection and flags). personally I have to admit I'm leaning towards the opinion that HEAP has taken the advantage of the increased penetration away from SAP AND retains the chance of causing secondary damage though fires now my own opinion of the RN cruisers is not the most... positive and I have to admit Ive given the Supertesters, Mods and Developers a fair amount of flak over how they were introduced. I keep using them out of sheer stubbornness but I find the SAP limitation on non-premium British Cruisers far too situational to be truly competitive in game. they work well enough in randoms against the clueless driving broadside on in a straight line. But in ranked battles where generally the players tend to be a lot more clued up on the ins and outs of the game mechanics are they competitive enough to be useful to the team or are they a hindrance? But this is not about my opinion, I've put this out there because I'm more interested in everyone else's view on the matter so the questions are up in a poll. do you think SAP has lost its edge with the introduction of IFHE? Is it time for wargaming to re-evaluate British Cruiser ammunition options? and if so what do you think is a viable (balanced) option for the replacement of SAP?
  22. Your thoughts? Edit: Does it help with the smoke bug?
  23. mandrakethe

    Smoke radio skill and decelleration

    Hello. When the RN cruisers came out someone quite nicely posted on here exactly what speed you could go into a hard turn, pop smoke, and not sail straight out of it once it was set. I wonder if anyone has worked this out with the 20% smoke radius skill attached? Just if anyone has a good idea, I've ruined a fair few battles getting that wrong that I just don't feel like experimenting. Yours sincerely, Mark
  24. Hello all! I've taken some of my time to start working on some no rust skins for the Royal Navy cuiser line! so far i have done: Belfast Fiji Edinburgh Neptune I will make the next skin tomorrow, stay tuned! I also included the PSD files with layers so you can create your own skin! HMS Belfast Download: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-J7AyxlHj0UM2FCOXhiRG9GRUE HMS Fiji Download: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-J7AyxlHj0UVVBCRDRVcURMVTg HMS Edinburgh Download: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-J7AyxlHj0UWkxISHpaR3FwZEk HMS Neptune Download: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-J7AyxlHj0UNWlJUFE4S203MVk I am open to suggestions and correct my if i made a mistake! Have fun and good hunting!
  25. _DQ_

    RN cruisers smoke bug

    Any ideas when the smoke bug (if ever) will be fixed? Its one of the [edited]most frustrating things currently in the game. Its not a tiny glitch or inconvenience. If your smoke deploys behind the ship instead of around it you are just dead. Again. And again. Before some starts saying something about how im sailing to fast or something like that, no im not. The bug affects only the second puff as i noticed. And it doesnt matter if im sailing with the speed of 15 or 2. In some cases it just deploys far behind my ship. Slightly off the first puff.
×