German Battleships?

[carvillan]

Type in Gotz von Berlichingen on google ans see what comes up......Thye removed the Barkmann and Wittman medals from WOT due to them being Waffen SS tank aces.  Also...GrossDeutschland were not a Waffen SS division; they were a Heer division and finally....Deutschland was renamed due to the fact that if it was sunk, there would have been a propaganda mess.

[Getzamatic]

 

It is possible, as pictured above, but:

-The turret needs to make a nearly 270 degree turn, which, knowing turret rotation speeds on BB's will take very long to do so

-Even if you succeed in turning the turret around, you have a very narrow field of fire for it

-Combine it with the fact, that the narrow firing arc forces you to expose a flat broadside to the enemy, 350mm belt or not, it's still dangerous

It can be implemented, but it would be very frustrating to use.

 

Well, they could give a ten gun broadside historically, so I don't why they shouldn't in the game.  All the drawbacks you note are perfectly legitimate issues, but perhaps might go some way towards balancing a ship at (presumably) tier four that has armour as good as Warspite or New Mexico...

 

I have a photo in one of my books of a Kaiser with all her guns trained to one side.  Unfortunately I have not been able to find a copy on line. Perhaps I should make a scan...

[mtm78]

 

Well, they could give a ten gun broadside historically, so I don't why they shouldn't in the game.  All the drawbacks you note are perfectly legitimate issues, but perhaps might go some way towards balancing a ship at (presumably) tier four that has armour as good as Warspite or New Mexico...

 

I have a photo in one of my books of a Kaiser with all her guns trained to one side.  Unfortunately I have not been able to find a copy on line. Perhaps I should make a scan...

 

If this thing makes it into tier 4 with that configuration I will be hard pressed not to retire my Imperator Nicolai in favor off this one ( though, Impy being premium does mean it would be much better credit maker ). 

 

Still, this looks like a very strong ship but it will probably be balanced by turret traverse and mobility. 

[Aotearas]

The Kaiser looks like a ship that requires its players to know that you can turn into the enemy in between full broadside salvos, or else it's going to be citadel city, mayor: you.

Though depending on how well the ship turns, it could be frightingly effective against players in tier III-V that like to show their own broadside.

 

Not sure how it might stack up against something like the Emperor Nicky (particularily because I don't own that ship), but its 12 guns and its strong armour make me doubt it'd fall into irrelevance soon. I have a hard time citadelling that one at even slight angles. Or might be RNG trolling me something fierce ... again.

[Foxhound128]

 

Well, they could give a ten gun broadside historically, so I don't why they shouldn't in the game.  All the drawbacks you note are perfectly legitimate issues, but perhaps might go some way towards balancing a ship at (presumably) tier four that has armour as good as Warspite or New Mexico...

 

I have a photo in one of my books of a Kaiser with all her guns trained to one side.  Unfortunately I have not been able to find a copy on line. Perhaps I should make a scan...

 

There you go:

[Mucker]

 

If this thing makes it into tier 4 with that configuration I will be hard pressed not to retire my Imperator Nicolai in favor off this one ( though, Impy being premium does mean it would be much better credit maker ). 

 

Why? Imperator seems to be much more flexible turret wise than Kaiser? I guess in the end much will come down to actual gun performance, but the Impy is quite stronk in that regard too. 

[Historynerd]

I would love to have a "Jutland" kind of battle/tier.

 

T4 Seydlitz vs. Queen Mary / König vs. Iron Duke / etc. 

 

When the appropriate tech trees are implemented, why not? Of course, on a smaller scale, as Deamon suggested?

 

We could just have them without the hull upgrades, and voilà, BB and BC slugfest for everyone.

[1MajorKoenig]

 

When the appropriate tech trees are implemented, why not? Of course, on a smaller scale, as Deamon suggested?

 

We could just have them without the hull upgrades, and voilà, BB and BC slugfest for everyone.

 

Count me in!

[mtm78]

 

Why? Imperator seems to be much more flexible turret wise than Kaiser? I guess in the end much will come down to actual gun performance, but the Impy is quite stronk in that regard too. 

 

Depending on exact armor configuration, 350mm belt armor sounds pretty decent especially if it has a good coffin design behind it. 

 

Awkward turret config or not, if the gun performance is there it would be a strong contender. 

 

 

When the appropriate tech trees are implemented, why not? Of course, on a smaller scale, as Deamon suggested?

 

We could just have them without the hull upgrades, and voilà, BB and BC slugfest for everyone.

 

I would play as well o7

[JeeWeeJ]

 

Crap armor? Find me a German cruiser which had good armor(ie superior to their contemporary counterparts) if you think that isn't the case.

 

SMS Blücher would like to have a word... 

 

Armor
Deck:	50-70 mm
Belt:	160-180 mm
Command Tower:	250 mm
Turrets:	180 mm

[Getzamatic]

 

There you go:

 

That's not actually the picture I had in mind, but is in fact even better.  Thanks...

[Historynerd]

Count me in!

 

I would play as well o7

 

I'd be interested as well.

 

Another potentially interesting scenario might be Punta Stilo; but that would have to wait a bit longer.

 

 

SMS Blücher would like to have a word... 

 

Armor
Deck:	50-70 mm
Belt:	160-180 mm
Command Tower:	250 mm
Turrets:	180 mm

 

Right; the Blücher would have been superior to all the other armoured cruisers in existence. But, as well as many other "lasts" of their kind, it arrived when its concept was outdated, and it had the misfortune of never fighting its intended opponents.

[Deamon93]

 

SMS Blücher would like to have a word... 

 

Armor
Deck:	50-70 mm
Belt:	160-180 mm
Command Tower:	250 mm
Turrets:	180 mm

 

It's not superior to the contemporaries, at least as far as protection is concerned.

 

 

I'd be interested as well.

 

Another potentially interesting scenario might be Punta Stilo; but that would have to wait a bit longer.

 

 

Right; the Blücher would have been superior to all the other armoured cruisers in existence. But, as well as many other "lasts" of their kind, it arrived when its concept was outdated, and it had the misfortune of never fighting its intended opponents.

 

Punta Stilo could be easily done as far as number of ships is concerned. It would take ages but that's another story

[Earl_of_Northesk]

So, as can be seen in the "interesting infos from RU"-thread, H41 is confirmed as T10 as for now.

 

4x2 42cm guns, 282m long. 20m more than Yamato.

[1MajorKoenig]

So, as can be seen in the "interesting infos from RU"-thread, H41 is confirmed as T10 as for now.

 

4x2 42cm guns, 282m long. 20m more than Yamato.

 

Big piece of metal...

[Historynerd]

It's not superior to the contemporaries, at least as far as protection is concerned.

 

I meant other armoured cruisers.

 

The HMS Minotaur had 152 mm on the belt, 51 mm on the deck, and only the tower and the turrets a bit more protected.

The USS Tennessee had thicker deck, but a thinner belt, and several of its 152 mm guns were in casemate, reportedly difficult to use.

The Rurik had again inferior belt and deck.

Same goes for the Edgar Quinet.

The Italian San Giorgio might be more of a match in terms of protection.

[JeeWeeJ]

Well, as History said: Blücher was THE ultimate armored cruiser...just a pity she was built to compete with a certain Invincible class...not really armored cruisers.

But, to say that Germany never built well protected cruisers is false...if they were competitive is a different matter. ;)

[Historynerd]

Well, as History said: Blücher was THE ultimate armored cruiser...just a pity she was built to compete with a certain Invincible class...not really armored cruisers.

But, to say that Germany never built well protected cruisers is false...if they were competitive is a different matter. ;)

 

It might also be said that they might have been built for other duties than cruisers build for other navies.

 

Several British cruisers were built for oversea duty, emphasizing their endurance, and not giving their firepower and protection the edge they would have needed to fight enemy forces made up of powerful armoured cruisers.

The Monmouth-class is a rather apparent case. They were obviously not meant to fight other armoured cruisers.

[Deamon93]

So, as can be seen in the "interesting infos from RU"-thread, H41 is confirmed as T10 as for now.

 

4x2 42cm guns, 282m long. 20m more than Yamato.

 

I guess H-41 survived the cut, which is fine considering H-42 is even bigger.

 

 

I meant other armoured cruisers.

 

The HMS Minotaur had 152 mm on the belt, 51 mm on the deck, and only the tower and the turrets a bit more protected.

The USS Tennessee had thicker deck, but a thinner belt, and several of its 152 mm guns were in casemate, reportedly difficult to use.

The Rurik had again inferior belt and deck.

Same goes for the Edgar Quinet.

The Italian San Giorgio might be more of a match in terms of protection.

 

Well San Giorgio was a tough nut to crack. Blucher overall was superior, this is safe to say.

 

Well, as History said: Blücher was THE ultimate armored cruiser...just a pity she was built to compete with a certain Invincible class...not really armored cruisers.

But, to say that Germany never built well protected cruisers is false...if they were competitive is a different matter. ;)

 

Well in the statement I was counting post WWI when the cruiser with the thickest belt(Graf Spee) had only 100 mm when there were already ships with much better protection, since he was bragging about Prinz Eugen

[Don71]

Salve,

 

which cruiser ships had 1935/36 much more armour then Graf Spee?

Graf Spee was very well armoured with 100mm inclined 14°, 125mm Barbettes, 145mm turrets, 40/70mm deck armour machinery/magazines and 40mm torpedo bulkhead, also her main belt was 4,5m high. She was a good armoured cruiser at her timeline.

[Historynerd]

Salve,

 

which cruiser ships had 1935/36 much more armour then Graf Spee?

Graf Spee was very well armoured with 100mm inclined 14°, 125mm Barbettes, 145mm turrets, 40/70mm deck armour machinery/magazines and 40mm torpedo bulkhead, also her main belt was 4,5m high. She was a good armoured cruiser at her timeline.

 

None; because the existing cruisers had to comply with the Washington Naval Treaty, which set their standard displacement at 10'000 tons. Without sacrificing either speed (which no one who built these ships did) or firepower (which some did somewhat, but not enough), there was little chance of getting even a similar degree of protection.

The Italian Zara-class did, but the designers consciously ignored the limits; the French Algerie also did, but it was almost a miracle.

[Don71]

Ähm,

 

the limitation of the Deutschland class was also 10000ts from the Versaille treaty, so I can't understand your argumentation.

 

The Graf Spee had 12600ts standard deplacemnet, very simular to the Zara class, Algerie, the modernized Myokos and Takaos. (all about 12000ts standard)

 

[Historynerd]

Ähm,

 

the limitation of the Deutschland class was also 10000ts from the Versaille treaty, so I can't understand your argumentation.

 

The Graf Spee had 12600ts Standart deplacemnet, very simular to the Zara class, Algerie, the modernized Myokos and Takaos.

 

In theory, but they were quite overweight from the start. Besides, by accepting to use diesel engines and to have a lower top speed (28 knots) the German designers freed up more weight to be used on armor.

 

The Zara had 11'500 t standard displacement; the Algerie was just within the 10'000 limit, the Japanese cruisers were much faster and were quite overarmed (ten 203 mm guns plus torpedo tubes).

So, the first two cases was not "very similar", and the latter two had other priorities and were no longer complying with the treaty; one British designer said, over the officially claimed values for these cruisers, that the Japanese were either building their ships of cardboard or lying.

[Don71]

 

In theory, but they were quite overweight from the start. Besides, by accepting to use diesel engines and to have a lower top speed (28 knots) the German designers freed up more weight to be used on armor.

 

The Zara had 11'500 t standard displacement; the Algerie was just within the 10'000 limit, the Japanese cruisers were much faster and were quite overarmed (ten 203 mm guns plus torpedo tubes).

So, the first two cases was not "very similar", and the latter two had other priorities and were no longer complying with the treaty; one British designer said, over the officially claimed values for these cruisers, that the Japanese were either building their ships of cardboard or lying.

 

Salve,

 

that's not correct!

 

1. Diesel engines with the MAN M9Z 42/58 were heavier then steam turbines!

The MI weight (the whole power train; engines, shafts, screws etc) of Graf Spee was 1710t. The MII weight (to power the ship) was 750t. In summary 2460t for the whole machinery.

The Diesel engines of this timeline costs weight and didn't save weight.

 

2. The Zara class was at 11900ts, Algeie was after Dumas at 12100ts, and the Myokos and Takoas were massivly rebuilt after the Taifun of 1935 and were both over 12000ts standard!

The Graf Spee had 12600ts standard with fuel in the machinery.

[Historynerd]

 

Salve,

 

that's not correct!

 

1. Diesel engines with the MAN M9Z 42/58 were heavier then steam turbines!

The MI weight (the whole power train; engines, shafts, screws etc) of Graf Spee was 1710t. The MII weight (to power the ship) was 750t. In summary 2460t for the whole machinery.

The Diesel engines of this timeline costs weight and didn't save weight.

 

2. The Zara class was at 11900ts, Algeie was after Dumas at 12100ts, and the Myokos and Takoas were massivly rebuilt after the Taifun of 1935 and were both over 12000ts standard!

 

Well, I stand corrected for the former.

 

The cruiser Fiume was measured with a standard displacement of roughly 11'500 tons.

I don't know what "after Dumas" means, but Algerie's standard displacement was 10'000, give or take a few dozen tons; no question about it.

The Japanese government gave notice in December 1934 that it wanted to terminate the Washington Naval Treaty; so, no surprise that after rebuilding these cruisers went overboard. Also, remember that these were armed to a ludicrous level (ten 203 mm guns, and from eight to twelve torpedo tubes with reloads, that's a lot of weight).