Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
TheSeaFARMER931

views on the HOOD/KONGO and the Siegried

42 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
7 posts
5,952 battles

so hey first time post played about 4000 games give or take (yes I know NOOB lol) I am curious as to what WG mite do to the hood?

as it seams the only navy to ever really use Battlecruisers to a large extent, seams to have the largest battlecruiser ever made and its a BB in game?

it can be said that these new t9 and T10 cruisers yoshino azuma and Russian balanced ships extra are battlecruisers (their not there just big cruisers). but with the knew German T9 being tested why is it a cruiser when by all means it is a BATTLECRUISER. buy all likelihood I bet the HMS Renown will be put in as a T5/6 battleship? The Renown and Siegried are pretty much identical in every way apart from the Siegried having very slightly more armour and being slightly faster but at the same time most likely having weaker AA, inferior radar and arguable less accurate guns because of radar to the late war Renown.

so the question is really why is the hood/Kongo where they are now? I cant see a reason why they couldn't be changed to be t9/t10 cruisers if WG isn't going to introduce a new BC line, as a hood VS a Siegried would probably end in a hood victory 60-70% of the time if they met as two battlecruisers which they are. just for some sort of continuity in the game. yes yes gona get them people from America extra saying the hood was a fast battleship (IT wasn't), and people saying that it sucks because Bismarck sank it extra. and yes its a game and wg will do what ever they want... (EDIT lol dint know it says how many games I played in my tag :D)

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BBMM]
Players
5,554 posts
6,741 battles
1 minute ago, TheSeaFARMER931 said:

yes yes gona get them people from America extra saying the hood was a fast battleship (IT wasn't),

The thing is, Hood can replace a BB. Something like Spee can't. Also... after last refit, Hood was better armoured than the Queen Elizabeths.

Yes, it was designed as a "battlecruiser"... but after lessons learned at Jutland, the armour was changed. The speed stayed though.

ALso has the same guns as the Queen Elizabeth. So, in WoWS, it can be a BB. 

 

 

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7 posts
5,952 battles
16 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

The thing is, Hood can replace a BB. Something like Spee can't. Also... after last refit, Hood was better armoured than the Queen Elizabeths. 

Yes, it was designed as a "battlecruiser"... but after lessons learned at Jutland, the armour was changed. The speed stayed though.

ALso has the same guns as the Queen Elizabeth. So, in WoWS, it can be a BB. 

 

 

 

 

Nope hood was not better armoured than the queens it had thicker armour than them in places but the overall scheme of armour was no where near as good as the queen liz class. a Admrill class battlecruiser wasn't designed to stand up to a 1 on 1 fight with say a Warspite or Barham type of battleship ye it mite win but it wasn't likely to. Hood was just a how do I say it... end all of battlecruiser design wasn't just designed as a battlecruiser it Was A Battlecruiser just the biggest battlecruiser ever built. haven come across any thing from any British admiral/historian that said she wasn't. almost all of the destroyers these days would be considered cruisers in ww2 but dose that stop them from being DDs. also Siegfried has same guns as a the T7 German BB....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
142 posts
3 minutes ago, TheSeaFARMER931 said:

almost all of the destroyers these days would be considered cruisers in ww2 but dose that stop them from being DDs.

 

The British Type 45 (Daring) "destroyer" is about the same size and weight as a Leander class cruiser so you tell me.

 

If we call USS Iowa a fishing boat, does that stop it from being a BB?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
24,930 posts
13,719 battles

Problem is BC are mostly a WW1 thing and they can be easily balanced as a BB.

The Supercruiser in game are late thirties developments with very high speeds and extremly good AA.

If you balance them as BB, they have weaker guns than WW1 BC,  but rather modern AA. Which Tier do you put them?

If you balance them as CA, you can just put them in game and put them in High Tier.

 

I would have preferred them as BB,  but WG decided to go the other way.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
9,432 posts
11,039 battles

Kongo as is, could sort of fit as tier 8, maybe 9 battlecruiser. But then, you need to find something to plug hole at tier 5. And no, downtiering Fuso and adding Ise at tier 6 won't do.

 

That, and going by wikipedia 1945 config of Haruna AA, thats more of tier 8 AA suite. Japanese AA suite which you can't expect to shoot down many planes with

 

 

6 minutes ago, Operation_Crossroads_1 said:

 

The British Type 45 (Daring) "destroyer" is about the same size and weight as a Leander class cruiser so you tell me.

 

If we call USS Iowa a fishing boat, does that stop it from being a BB?

The same reason Scharnhorst is considered BB - there is more to ship equation than guns alone. Scharnhorst twins have not only battleship level of protection, its actually best in tier. Same gun caliber Graf Spee have armor more in line with cruisers, also limited amount of guns lends itself to cruiser placement.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7 posts
5,952 battles
16 minutes ago, Operation_Crossroads_1 said:

 

The British Type 45 (Daring) "destroyer" is about the same size and weight as a Leander class cruiser so you tell me.

 

If we call USS Iowa a fishing boat, does that stop it from being a BB?

that's the point you cant call a hood a battleship just because shes the biggest battlecruiser....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
142 posts
2 minutes ago, Panocek said:

The same reason Scharnhorst is considered BB - there is more to ship equation than guns alone.

 

Going a bit O/T, but I have to say that I disagree with Scharnhorst being considered as a BB.

 

The point of a BB is that it is supposed to be able to fight another BB on somewhat equal terms and Scharn clearly couldn't do that, no matter how good the armour the guns were simply too small to be effective.

 

There's more to the equation than guns alone, but they're a big part of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7,493 posts
8,304 battles
4 minutes ago, Panocek said:

Kongo as is, could sort of fit as tier 8, maybe 9 battlecruiser. But then, you need to find something to plug hole at tier 5. And no, downtiering Fuso and adding Ise at tier 6 won't do.

 

That, and going by wikipedia 1945 config of Haruna AA, thats more of tier 8 AA suite. Japanese AA suite which you can't expect to shoot down many planes with

By that logic, you also need a new T4, because ripping out Kongo and making it a cruiser but leaving Myogi is not very sensible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7 posts
5,952 battles
8 minutes ago, Panocek said:

Kongo as is, could sort of fit as tier 8, maybe 9 battlecruiser. But then, you need to find something to plug hole at tier 5. And no, downtiering Fuso and adding Ise at tier 6 won't do.

 

That, and going by wikipedia 1945 config of Haruna AA, thats more of tier 8 AA suite. Japanese AA suite which you can't expect to shoot down many planes with

 

 

The same reason Scharnhorst is considered BB - there is more to ship equation than guns alone. Scharnhorst twins have not only battleship level of protection, its actually best in tier. Same gun caliber Graf Spee have armor more in line with cruisers, also limited amount of guns lends itself to cruiser placement.

ye but the twins weren't battlecruisers they were battleships...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
9,432 posts
11,039 battles
1 minute ago, Operation_Crossroads_1 said:

 

Going a bit O/T, but I have to say that I disagree with Scharnhorst being considered as a BB.

 

The point of a BB is that it is supposed to be able to fight another BB on somewhat equal terms and Scharn clearly couldn't do that, no matter how good the armour the guns were simply too small to be effective.

 

There's more to the equation than guns alone, but they're a big part of it.

Scharn is a premium ship. And of that rare breed of being unique to play, without being overpowered or otherwise broken. Just like Atlanta with her (many) DD caliber guns is a cruiser. And fun one at that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
142 posts
1 minute ago, TheSeaFARMER931 said:

that's the point you cant call a hood a battleship just because shes the biggest battlecruiser....

 

 

Lest be clear here, Hood was not just the biggest BC, she was bigger than every battleship in the world at launch and still bigger than almost all by WW2.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
142 posts
1 minute ago, Panocek said:

Scharn is a premium ship. And of that rare breed of being unique to play, without being overpowered or otherwise broken. Just like Atlanta with her (many) DD caliber guns is a cruiser. And fun one at that.

 

Okay, but I was talking about IRL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7 posts
5,952 battles
Just now, Operation_Crossroads_1 said:

 

Lest be clear here, Hood was not just the biggest BC, she was bigger than every battleship in the world at launch and still bigger than almost all by WW2.

yes? just because she was long and rather beef cake still dose not make her a BB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7 posts
5,952 battles
18 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

Problem is BC are mostly a WW1 thing and they can be easily balanced as a BB.

The Supercruiser in game are late thirties developments with very high speeds and extremly good AA.

If you balance them as BB, they have weaker guns than WW1 BC,  but rather modern AA. Which Tier do you put them?

If you balance them as CA, you can just put them in game and put them in High Tier.

 

I would have preferred them as BB,  but WG decided to go the other way.

 

 

yes but what about Siegried? Renown would have been an + match to her? and the rest of the T10 T9 big cruisers are cruisers/supercruisers but the Siegried is most defiantly a BC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
9,432 posts
11,039 battles
11 minutes ago, TheSeaFARMER931 said:

ye but the twins weren't battlecruisers they were battleships...

As built, they were somewhat difficult to classify. Battleship armor, but definitely not battleship guns. Brits, as well rest of the world for that matter definition of a battlecruiser was ship with BB guns but with cruiserlike armor, that usually was improved as refits went on (Renown, Repulse, Kongos and what have you). Germans with Scharnies went other way around, focusing on protection, akin to anecdote "primary task for a warship is to stay afloat". Dunno if its someone quote or what, but describes Scharnhorsts just fine

 

Should twins get their supposed refit to 380mm guns (in game Gneisenau) then they would be fully fledged (fast) battleships

 

1 minute ago, TheSeaFARMER931 said:

yes but what about Siegried? Renown would have been an + match to her? and the rest of the T10 T9 big cruisers are cruisers/supercruisers but the Siegried is most defiantly a BC.

Based on raw numbers for armor, Siegfried and Renown would be quite similar, though Renown would be slower and most definitely she would need "what if" AA retrofit, because her latewar config is merely comparable to tier 6 Queen Elizabeth in game.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[INTRO]
[INTRO]
Players
1,308 posts
15,713 battles

There are too few ships called "Battlecruisers" to make a separate class of them. According to Wikipedia only 23 (in three nations and 12 classes) were ever built during a period of about 15 years. (Depending on how you count them.)

Sure, we can ad paperships, and we have (Prinz Eitel Friedrich, Izmail, Amagi, Myogi, Ishizuchi) but that would not be enough.

The battlecruiser concept was a shortlived thing built to counter the dying "Armored cruiser" and with those gone the Battlecruiser was out of a job. Plus the implementation of better propultion systems meant that you didn't need to sacrifice armor for speed anymore.

 

I could go on for an hour or two but that would only lead to a debate that I don't have the time or energy to handle.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
24,930 posts
13,719 battles
13 minutes ago, TheSeaFARMER931 said:

yes but what about Siegried? Renown would have been an + match to her? and the rest of the T10 T9 big cruisers are cruisers/supercruisers but the Siegried is most defiantly a BC.

Siegfried would have been a Tier VII BB at best, with heavy improvements.

Tier VII is also the place where we expect the Ersatz-Yorck-Class BC.

That is probably the reason WG decided against O-Class being a BB and therefore they made her a CA, which makes it necessary to be put at a much higher Tier.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JRM]
Players
5,545 posts
22,760 battles
1 hour ago, TheSeaFARMER931 said:

 from America extra saying the hood was a fast battleship (IT wasn't), and people saying that it sucks because Bismarck sank it extra. and yes its a game and wg will do what ever they want... (EDIT lol dint know it says how many games I played in my tag :D)

Hood had 5000t of armor added to it and it stopped beeing a BC at that moment and became a BB, the wery definiton of BC is "BB guns (guns that outrange and outgun heavy cruisers) and "anti cruiser" armor (not meant to stop bb caliber) coupled with speed that is superior to BBs ie point of a BC is - gun down any cruiser and run from any bb you see, the very proof to that was jutland where it was obvious WHY BCs shoulnt be in a battle line vs dradnoughts, putting them in a place they were specifically designed NOT to be and doing the job they were NEVER meant to do, ended, well as cold have been expected really...

 

The CC or "capital cruisers" aka large cruisers are somewhat of a "gray zone" as to how to slot them in game, most likely reason for how they are doing it (sloting them as cruisers) is the combinaton of bb overpopulation (esp in high tiers) and bb cap in cw making them rather desirable so people invest time/money to get them

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
234 posts
1,188 battles
2 hours ago, Panocek said:

Kongo as is, could sort of fit as tier 8, maybe 9 battlecruiser. But then, you need to find something to plug hole at tier 5. And no, downtiering Fuso and adding Ise at tier 6 won't do.

 

That, and going by wikipedia 1945 config of Haruna AA, thats more of tier 8 AA suite. Japanese AA suite which you can't expect to shoot down many planes with

 

Well, there were a few dozen different designs around the late 10s/early 20s by that Hiraga fellow.

That said, I doubt that many of those have survived, and a few of them are already in the game as mid/high tiers (Ashitaka/Amagi, Kii).

Kongou also has a lot of history to it, being both the last BB to be constructed outside of Japan and the first BB to be constructed on native soil/water (well, the sisterships at least).

Plus, while she started out as a Battlecruiser, several refits later saw them reclassified as (Fast) Battleships.

 

So yeah, between the lack of suitable replacements, and the history behind the ship, I don't think that the techtree ship should be changed.

One of her sisterships might make a fine premium though... :fish_cute_2:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BBMM]
Players
5,554 posts
6,741 battles
9 hours ago, Yedwy said:

Hood had 5000t of armor added to it and it stopped beeing a BC at that moment and became a BB, the wery definiton of BC is "BB guns (guns that outrange and outgun heavy cruisers) and "anti cruiser" armor (not meant to stop bb caliber) coupled with speed that is superior to BBs ie point of a BC is - gun down any cruiser and run from any bb you see, the very proof to that was jutland where it was obvious WHY BCs shoulnt be in a battle line vs dradnoughts, putting them in a place they were specifically designed NOT to be and doing the job they were NEVER meant to do, ended, well as cold have been expected really...

 

The CC or "capital cruisers" aka large cruisers are somewhat of a "gray zone" as to how to slot them in game, most likely reason for how they are doing it (sloting them as cruisers) is the combinaton of bb overpopulation (esp in high tiers) and bb cap in cw making them rather desirable so people invest time/money to get them

Jutland was indeed the deciding factor. But here's what the experts say. 

ANyway in WG it is a BB, and rightly so. 

http://www.hmshood.com/history/construct/design.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,976 posts
10,961 battles
On 7/19/2019 at 9:55 PM, Operation_Crossroads_1 said:

 

Lest be clear here, Hood was not just the biggest BC, she was bigger than every battleship in the world at launch and still bigger than almost all by WW2.

Launching a battleship which was, at launch, the biggest battleship ever launched, was actually quite a common thing :Smile-_tongue:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RL7S]
Players
248 posts
3,271 battles
On 7/19/2019 at 9:13 PM, Hanse77SWE said:

There are too few ships called "Battlecruisers" to make a separate class of them. According to Wikipedia only 23 (in three nations and 12 classes) were ever built during a period of about 15 years. (Depending on how you count them.)

Sure, we can ad paperships, and we have (Prinz Eitel Friedrich, Izmail, Amagi, Myogi, Ishizuchi) but that would not be enough.

The battlecruiser concept was a shortlived thing built to counter the dying "Armored cruiser" and with those gone the Battlecruiser was out of a job. Plus the implementation of better propultion systems meant that you didn't need to sacrifice armor for speed anymore.

 

I could go on for an hour or two but that would only lead to a debate that I don't have the time or energy to handle.

 

And then the armored cruiser got replaced by the heavy cruiser, leading to a whole new WW2 era generation of battlecruisers commisioned, laid down or just planned.

 

Regardless of what anyone called the Alaska, Kronstadt or B-65 (Azuma) classes they were all battlecruisers, ones that had returned to the original concept of a fast big gun ship designed to destroy cruisers. Battlecruisers were never intended to fight battleships head-to-head despite how some tried to use them in WW1 and designers sensibly realised you don't need 15in guns to kill cruisers, all you need is something that can reliably beat cruiser armor (11-12in guns) and protection against 8in heavy cruiser return fire.

 

Scharnhorst is a battlecruiser too, just one following the unique German version which has less firepower but near-battleship armor, if you look at WW1 German battlecruisers they all follow the same pattern as Scharnhorst. Not to mention, Scharnhorst is not protected against guns larger than 11-12in, the vertical protection may be good but deck armor is weak, even Duke of York's 14in shells easily went through Scharnhorst's deck when the battlecruiser was in combat with a real battleship.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OILUP]
Players
185 posts
3 minutes ago, Alex_Connor said:

 

And then the armored cruiser got replaced by the heavy cruiser, leading to a whole new WW2 era generation of battlecruisers commisioned, laid down or just planned.

 

Regardless of what anyone called the Alaska, Kronstadt or B-65 (Azuma) classes they were all battlecruisers, ones that had returned to the original concept of a fast big gun ship designed to destroy cruisers. Battlecruisers were never intended to fight battleships head-to-head despite how some tried to use them in WW1 and designers sensibly realised you don't need 15in guns to kill cruisers, all you need is something that can reliably beat cruiser armor (11-12in guns) and protection against 8in heavy cruiser return fire.

 

Scharnhorst is a battlecruiser too, just one following the unique German version which has less firepower but near-battleship armor, if you look at WW1 German battlecruisers they all follow the same pattern as Scharnhorst. Not to mention, Scharnhorst is not protected against guns larger than 11-12in, the vertical protection may be good but deck armor is weak, even Duke of York's 14in shells easily went through Scharnhorst's deck when the battlecruiser was in combat with a real battleship.

Battlecrusiers got outdated as a whole due to fast bb's it actually is a bit silly to have fantasy post war bc's in that regard.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×