Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 1 battles to post in this section.
The_EURL_Guy

Naval Legends: Battleship Bismarck – Trailer

13 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[OMPG]
Beta Tester
292 posts
5,631 battles
2 hours ago, motor_g_b said:

 Bismark it destroyed a World War 1 Battle Cruiser then got sunk but it does get the WG love, I just feel for the crews sent to fight in inferior ships by those who should know better :Smile_honoring:

Even with 1920 layout one could say that Hood was pretty far from a WW 1 Battlecruiser. One could say that Hood was the world´s first fast battleship. Outclassed by Bismarck sure but still a capable and pretty well armored ship unlike those WW 1 Battlecruisers.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,131 posts
2,900 battles
On 5/23/2020 at 5:19 PM, Peter_Snowmane said:

*edit*

You're getting a bit too... National biased i guess; you can complain about the balance or the historical accuracy, but this isn't a simulator in the first place and your arguments aren't really going in a good direction imo.

 

Anyway, the fate of Hood was already dicided the moment she left Scapa Flow, and nobody could have done anything to prevent it (outside of not sending Hood in the first place or going back in time and refitting her), and that was due to, not really a design flaw, but more of the result of not upgrading her, that being that her deck armour was designed to be able to withstand WW1 German AP fuses, which were much shorter then the WW2 ones, and in fact, if Bismarck had used WW1 fuses, Hood's deck armour could have been fine, however, the fuses Bismarck used were much longer, with the result that the shells went straight through Hood's deck, into her magazine and detonating it. No-one could have done anything about it. 

What ultimately give Bismarck the killing blow were the Swordfishes that torpedoed her and broke her rudder (also reducing her speed), reducing her into a sitting duck, and against so many ships, it was just a matter of time before she sunked. Even the best battleship, if it's alone against literally everyone else, it's going to get sunked.

 

On 5/23/2020 at 5:58 PM, TohtoriP said:

Even with 1920 layout one could say that Hood was pretty far from a WW 1 Battlecruiser. One could say that Hood was the world´s first fast battleship. Outclassed by Bismarck sure but still a capable and pretty well armored ship unlike those WW 1 Battlecruisers.

I kind of agree, however, saying what is a battlecruiser and what isn't is a bit sketchy, i mean, take the Scharnhorsts for example, are they battlecruisers or fast battleships? Some people consider them battleships and others (me included) consider them battlecruiers; but still, it's very difficult to decide what is a battlecruiser

 

P.S. Always remember to mount your Juliet Charlies PCEF010_JC_SignalFlag.png to prevent detonations :Smile_trollface:

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
311 posts
2 hours ago, wot_2016_gunner said:

Anyway, the fate of Hood was already dicided the moment she left Scapa Flow, and nobody could have done anything to prevent it (outside of not sending Hood in the first place or going back in time and refitting her), and that was due to, not really a design flaw, but more of the result of not upgrading her, that being that her deck armour was designed to be able to withstand WW1 German AP fuses, which were much shorter then the WW2 ones, and in fact, if Bismarck had used WW1 fuses, Hood's deck armour could have been fine, however, the fuses Bismarck used were much longer, with the result that the shells went straight through Hood's deck, into her magazine and detonating it. No-one could have done anything about it. 

What ultimately give Bismarck the killing blow were the Swordfishes that torpedoed her and broke her rudder (also reducing her speed), reducing her into a sitting duck, and against so many ships, it was just a matter of time before she sunked. Even the best battleship, if it's alone against literally everyone else, it's going to get sunked.

Respectfully, the first part of your statement there is pretty far-fetched: there's no way anyone could have known how the Hood/Bismarck encounter was going to go before she'd even left port. Yes, the Hood had thin deck armour by the standards of the day; yes, the admiralty were planning on refitting her as soon as funds, space and circumstances would allow; but to assume that she was automatically a write-off against Bismarck is pretty over-the-top. For a start, she had the same number and calibre of guns (with modern shells to boot, no more Jutland shatters), secondly in places her armour belt was thicker than Bismarck's was. The shell hitting her magazine (which have their own armour systems by the way, it's not just the deck keeping the weather out) was sheer bad (or good, from the other point of view) luck that would have done for significantly better-protected ships just as well.

 

2 hours ago, wot_2016_gunner said:

I kind of agree, however, saying what is a battlecruiser and what isn't is a bit sketchy, i mean, take the Scharnhorsts for example, are they battlecruisers or fast battleships? Some people consider them battleships and others (me included) consider them battlecruiers; but still, it's very difficult to decide what is a battlecruiser

Again, no disrespect intended but it's really quite easy to tell the difference in the majority of cases, particularly with Scharnhorst and Gneisenau: they were battleships (as they were in fact referred to when entering service) that happened to have smaller guns than other battleships; renaming them to battlecruisers might have been a sop to Hitler's ego (because of their teeny weeny guns compared to all the other battleships of the world), but it didn't make it so. Similarly the RN always called Hood a battlecruiser, and put her in the battlecruiser squadron: doesn't change the fact that her protection scheme and armament was an improvement on the Queen Elizabeths and thus with her substantially improved propulsion machinery she was a fast battleship (unless you consider the QEs to be battlecruisers as well, I suppose). Of course if you're wanting to talk marginal cases, Renown might be a better candidate as she was (ultimately) much closer to the border between the two types.

 

A battlecruiser is a ship with battleship guns, notionally more speed, but less than battleship levels of armour; it's not just a fast battleship and it's not a battleship with smaller-than-average guns. If you want to go into grey areas then exactly what constitutes 'battleship levels of armour' is probably a good one, but I'd imagine that any and all navies of the period probably had their own definitions (possibly to do with simple maximum main belt thickness or ratio of armour against total tonnage, something along those lines). The point is, these were defined terms and not mystical titles conferred by secret and arcane rituals (unlike 'Commodore', or 'Prime Minister'...).

 

2 hours ago, wot_2016_gunner said:

P.S. Always remember to mount your Juliet Charlies PCEF010_JC_SignalFlag.png to prevent detonations :Smile_trollface:

Now there's something I'll wholeheartedly support, it's only common sense to wear protection against premature explosions :Smile_trollface:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
303 posts
On 5/23/2020 at 5:19 PM, Peter_Snowmane said:

*edit*

First of all, I was referring to the Admiralty not sending the ship for a Warspite/Queen Elisabeth refit during the 30;s and using her as a Symbol of power instead.  The Admiralty then sending HMS Hood out with known faults and in the state of repair she was in, they took a chance on a probably million to one shot happening... I said the crew I think that would include  Vice Admiral Sir Lancelot Holland who made all the correct manoeuvres as has been proved by the rudder position on the wreck and like everyone on board was doing as ordered by the Aforesaid Admiralty

As for Britania Rules the Waves well yes it did but not in Wargamiing as I pointed out, The Bismarks fame was blowing up an unmodernised aged first war designed Battle Cruiser and then getting sunk no untruths there I pointed out it was not the crews fault on either side as Bismark had some major design faults as well

PS OMG I nearly Forgot sorry for the spelling mistake, I put you one or two in this for you

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
303 posts

 Well I've made post after post about Royal Navy ships being nerfed to death before getting released, Had a melt down or two about the new RN Heavies Including the Cheshire even talking to the WG staff about why they do it, The comment I made was a light hearted dig at WG about how they treat the Royal Navy lines.  No insult made or implied to anyone aboard the Hood or for that matter Bismark and certainly not Sir Lancelot Holland whom  I read about as a child, Doubts were then still being cast on his command all of which have been proved wrong in the fullness of time The next thing I find is some one ranting about spelling mistakes and having a melt down I've read the post twice to see where I was supposed to have blamed him but no nothing, I think one of us is making themselves look a little Overly Confrontational and loosing credibility, I do hope it's not me looking for the plot, but who knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
303 posts

So true  I watched the Dockyard assembling the ships a few days ago, Truly Amazing Artwork indeed

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
239 posts

Bismarck has one contender for the most famous WW II ship. The other contender being the Yamato.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,131 posts
2,900 battles
8 hours ago, Peter_Snowmane said:

*edit*

Says again the guy that writes with bolded text when literally everyone else in the forum doesn't!. Despite their age, unless they want to highlight something.

 

8 hours ago, Peter_Snowmane said:

*edit*

I'm happy to remind you that Monarch, Lion, Conqueror, Minotaur, Neptune, Goliath, Drake and maybe others are paper ships. I'm honeslty perfectly fine with paper ships, as long as they are balanced.

 

8 hours ago, Peter_Snowmane said:

*edit*

 

8 hours ago, Peter_Snowmane said:

*edit*

which is not what World of Warships is.

 

8 hours ago, Peter_Snowmane said:

*edit*

think again, because two harder to balance things exists; Aircraft Carriers and Submarines.:Smile_trollface:

 

8 hours ago, Peter_Snowmane said:

*edit*

*edit*

 

About eyesight tho, you know who this guy is?

Chuck_Yeager.jpg

now he's 97 (the picture is from 2012, he was 89 there) adn he had 20/10 uncorrected vision (it's not a misstype, not 10, it's 20/10), and while he did lost a tiny bit due to age, his vision is still really good (at least it's what he said on twitter about 2 years ago https://twitter.com/genchuckyeager/status/948076977633746945 )

 

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Moderator
1,118 posts
7,964 battles

Hello,

          I've cleaned up the thread. I'm going to ask people to remember to remain respectful and on topic.

 

Regards,

               Minia

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ROHAN]
Players
31 posts

You have cleaned up nothing except another source of income for this company.

 

By censoring a representative of the collectors and taking the side of a very small group of milennial forum trolls that defend the worst Russian egofantasy ships for the glory of their own egos.

 

The thing is - you can kill the messenger but you can't kill the truth.

 

And there is no higher truth to this company than money.

 

I am the one you should have defended. Not some nasty buttweasels who will use any low trick - like complaining about a slightly larger font size, to make phony arguments against me and others like me who want to protect the collectors and the financial future of this company.

 

There are many people here with bad eyesight, many older chaps. They like easy to read text. SELECT YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT STATEMENT: TRUE/FALSE/I AM MILLENIAL SO I DON'T GIVE A FLYING [edited]ABOUT OLDER PEOPLE. You seem to have chosen the last "CptMinia".

 

 

  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×