Jump to content
KIllerbin34

HMS Dreadnought and HMS Vanguard: The First and the Last.

31 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
2,575 posts
3,520 battles

HMS Rearguard should be..interesting. Dreadnought..If it wasn't for her being what she is, she'd be a hard pass for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Modder, Alpha Tester
1,650 posts
879 battles
3 minutes ago, puxflacet said:

I was hoping for this paintscheme for Vanguard...but WG would receive way to many bug reports i guess, right?

4f788ce99ba4df049d8d25b3ec3865bd.jpg

I'll be dealing with that, don't you worry.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
251 posts
14,730 battles
12 minutes ago, zFireWyvern said:

I'll be dealing with that, don't you worry.

I can see it already.

'What colour do you want sir ?

White.

Like the turrets or the funnels sir?

White'

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4 posts
9,207 battles

Dear Wargaming, if you EDIT up HMS Vanguard there will be consequences and repercussions ;)

 

That is all.

Edited by Kampa1987
Vulgarism

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
204 posts
2,722 battles

Little known fact - at the end of the war, the RN lost so many experienced personnel that eventually they only had enough trained gun crew to man one of Vanguards turrets. '

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
251 posts
14,730 battles
20 minutes ago, Pametrada said:

Little known fact - at the end of the war, the RN lost so many experienced personnel that eventually they only had enough trained gun crew to man one of Vanguards turrets. '

Not entirely true. The reason Vanguard didn't have a full gun crew was to save money. In the event of war she would have had a full crew complement.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
204 posts
2,722 battles
1 minute ago, KIllerbin34 said:

Not entirely true. The reason Vanguard didn't have a full gun crew was to save money. In the event of war she would have had a full crew complement.

Sorry, but according to the book I read ( and admittedly it was a few years ago ) it was due to personnel shortages after so many had demobbed at the end of the war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
251 posts
14,730 battles
1 hour ago, Pametrada said:

Sorry, but according to the book I read ( and admittedly it was a few years ago ) it was due to personnel shortages after so many had demobbed at the end of the war.

Thats what I meant it was too expensive to maintain a  full crew for her due to shortages in manpower and funds.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
204 posts
2,722 battles
10 minutes ago, KIllerbin34 said:

Thats what I meant it was too expensive to maintain a  full crew for her due to shortages in manpower and funds.

Ah, okay, I see. Looks like we're both saying the same thing but with different emphasis. Damned shame she wasn't preserved, eh ?  There'd be no shortage of people going aboard her now. :Smile_Default:

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,614 posts
8,376 battles
26 minutes ago, Pametrada said:

Ah, okay, I see. Looks like we're both saying the same thing but with different emphasis. Damned shame she wasn't preserved, eh ?  There'd be no shortage of people going aboard her now. :Smile_Default:

 

Definitely :Smile_great:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[N-F-G]
Players
65 posts
5,988 battles

I wish the Supertesters luck with Vanguard (and with convincing the devs that their first draft is awful) because those stats as they are now look like absolute trash.

 

8x15' guns at tier 8 - ok, not good but could make that work, but with that 30s reload and 72s(!) traverse? Are you actually kidding? I've learned entire new languages worth of swear-words hearing people talk about Monarch and this initial version of Vanguard is even worse than that.

 

... They could give Dreadnought water-balloons for shells though and I'd still buy that. Damnit all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-T-O-]
Alpha Tester, Players, In AlfaTesters
2,185 posts
6,367 battles

lol they EDIT up Vanguard gg WG

 

I hope you fix that BS

Edited by Kampa1987
Vulgarism

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JUNK]
[JUNK]
Beta Tester
1,927 posts
7,915 battles

15" mk1 guns accuracy table

Tier 6 - 2.0 sigma (Warspite and QE)

Tier 7 - 1.9 sigma (Hood)

tier 8 - 1.8 sigma (Vanguard)

 

Ahh, ofc you want to lose accuracy but keep more or less same guns when progressing a tier. 2.0 sigma when facing tier 5s, but 1.8 sigma when facing tier 10s... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles

I'd be patient before getting the pitchforks out.

 

 

 

Remember WG have to convince us that Vanguard is worth spending about £40 on. The buffs will come, remember Alabama and Hood as examples. Both got buffed up pre release.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
251 posts
14,730 battles

https://thedailybounce.net/2018/09/21/world-of-warships-supertest-hms-vanguard-full-details/

 

 Her model is stunning also did a bit of searching and it seems her AP has the Highest Krupp value of all the British 15 Inch guns including the Monarch.

Warspite - 2330

Hood - 2190

Monarch- 2250

Vanguard - 2400

 

I can't find the Fuse time for Vanguard but it certainly seems they've modelled Supercharge in terms of possible penetration as well as just Shell velocity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JUNK]
[JUNK]
Beta Tester
1,927 posts
7,915 battles
18 hours ago, Negativvv said:

I'd be patient before getting the pitchforks out.

 

 

 

Remember WG have to convince us that Vanguard is worth spending about £40 on. The buffs will come, remember Alabama and Hood as examples. Both got buffed up pre release.

 

The first iteration is a very good indicator of how well it will be implemented. Remember they buffed Hood by halving the turret traverse (half of historical values) and made one of the worst AA weapons into one of the best.... This is a bad first impressions and experience tells me I will most likely be dissapointed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles
3 hours ago, Affeks said:

The first iteration is a very good indicator of how well it will be implemented. Remember they buffed Hood by halving the turret traverse (half of historical values) and made one of the worst AA weapons into one of the best.... This is a bad first impressions and experience tells me I will most likely be dissapointed.

Will wait and see but Hood performs wonderfully now as it has such longevity.

 

Vanguard need to have very accurate, hard hitting guns to be worth the price I think. As much as I convert it, I'm not paying "that" much money for a weak ship. Even ultra accurate and hard tipped 15" AP won't be game breaking as lots of higher tier ships can auto bounce you...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-BSH-]
Players
49 posts
4,461 battles
On 21/09/2018 at 11:12 PM, Negativvv said:

Will wait and see but Hood performs wonderfully now as it has such longevity.

 

Vanguard need to have very accurate, hard hitting guns to be worth the price I think. As much as I convert it, I'm not paying "that" much money for a weak ship. Even ultra accurate and hard tipped 15" AP won't be game breaking as lots of higher tier ships can auto bounce you...

Not to mention USN cruisers :cap_fainting:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
816 posts

Nice looking ship model, it's also nice to see they added that 3rd anchor chain on the Vanguard model that is missing from a number of BB British ships and spoils the look "Hood, DOY, King George, Monarch and Lion". Not sure why they left the 3rd anchor chain missing on those ship models, it kinda spoils the overall cosmetic look of them if you ask me.

 

As nice as the ship looks, I think I'd sooner spend the same money on dabloons to get the Nelson instead. For me it would cost the same for either ship. I'm not a fan either of 4 x 2 turret setup of only 8 guns. Already got the Hood which has the same, I also had the Warsprite with the same 8 guns setup. Just too much of the same thing really in this Vanguard, and at Tier 8 can somehow see it being less competitive than the Hood or Warspite sitting at t6 and t7. This is in the top tier matches mostly.

 

Here is my main gripe about this ship reading WIKI on the Vanguard. It so called has "very bad" firing angles which means you have to show broadside a lot to fire more than 4 guns (and with a slow turret transverse speed). And then the ship is said to have weak armour to take heavy damage doing it. And it'll be playing at T8,9,10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
56 posts
3,342 battles

So the only way to get the Dreadnought is to be forced to buy a T8 premium..... the one ship that redefined warships for all time.... the one ship that should have been in the game from the start..... riiiggghhht seems legit. Honestly WG it may not have made you much but I would have bought the Dreadnought to sit proudly alongside my numerous other premiums but with a blatant cash grab like this I think not. :Smile_facepalm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×