German BB line !

[Getzamatic]

 

It's basically the same height as the old WW1 funnels.

 

​Pretty much.  Baden and Bayern had proportionally taller funnels than the Konigs , their half sisters Sachsen and Wurtemberg would have had higher funnels still.  Apparently this was to prevent smoke interference with the spotting tops, which seems a bit counter intuitive to me, but presumably the designers knew what they were doing...

[Sigimundus]

Kaseko, I assume that's the B hull for Bayern.  It actually doesn't look that bad to me.

 

Yes it is upgraded hull

 

The stock looks like this:

 

 

[Comrad_StaIin]

adding a funnel cap doesnt require such a tall funnel

I would have been cut down

 

also they shaved of a third of her 150mm secondaries

[Todger_Fairmile]

 

also they shaved of a third of her 150mm secondaries

And added 6 dp 105mm to each side firing he (in addition to remaining 150's firing ap) for extra chance of fire and effectiveness vs DD's. Given the mechanics of the game. I'd rather they all (105's and 150's) fire he.

[Comrad_StaIin]

but AP secondaries wreck cruisers

[Todger_Fairmile]

but AP secondaries wreck cruisers

 

Yeah, but HE secondaries set them, and DD's and BB's, and CV's on fire. AP secondaries (in the game) over pen DD's and CV's, and bounce on BB armour. I've had too many DD's get in close to want to rely on AP secondaries. There's a reason all of Warspite's secondaries fire HE.

[GrossadmiralThrawn]

oh the rage about the german BB-Line is growing and growing... THEY FRECKING SCREWED THE WHOLE ARMOUR FROM TIER III TO TIER VII IT SEEMS THOSE BLOODY... Wargaming... start brain.exe if you have it... the 305m GK VS less then 280m and lighter Yamato... Yamato gets more health... Citadel armour gets screwed til Bismarck...

[Diminios]

oh the rage about the german BB-Line is growing and growing... THEY FRECKING SCREWED THE WHOLE ARMOUR FROM TIER III TO TIER VII IT SEEMS THOSE BLOODY... Wargaming... start brain.exe if you have it... the 305m GK VS less then 280m and lighter Yamato... Yamato gets more health... Citadel armour gets screwed til Bismarck...

 

I'm curious how they even managed that. Gneisenau was the sister ship of Scharnhorst, which at least implies that the armor protection was similar... and yet the Scheisenau has 2/3 the citadel armor of its sister.

[fnord_disc]

 

I'm curious how they even managed that. Gneisenau was the sister ship of Scharnhorst, which at least implies that the armor protection was similar... and yet the Scheisenau has 2/3 the citadel armor of its sister.

 

When are people like you going to understand that those values are meaningless?

 

Armor model or go home.

[Diminios]

 

When are people like you going to understand that those values are meaningless?

 

Armor model or go home.

 

We'll understand it when people like you understand that we have no armor model viewer in the game. Or outside the game, for that matter (gamemodels3d doesn't have an armor model for those ships yet). So those numbers are all we have.

[Zerstoeroer]

 

When are people like you going to understand that those values are meaningless?

 

Armor model or go home.

 

So you are saying that, ceteris paribus, the Gneisenau's armor will not be vastly inferior to the Sharnhorst's?

[fnord_disc]

 

So you are saying that, ceteris paribus, the Gneisenau's armor will not be vastly inferior to the Sharnhorst's?

 

I'm saying that there is no way to know until the armor model has been mined. The values displayed in the port and given on the wiki are meaningless. It might be worse. It might be the same. It might be better! The numbers mean nothing.

[Zerstoeroer]

 

I'm saying that there is no way to know until the armor model has been mined. The values displayed in the port and given on the wiki are meaningless. It might be worse. It might be the same. It might be better! The numbers mean nothing.

 

You are aware that Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were sister ships, aren't you? This means that thy should be (nearly) identical with the same armor model. Just like Tirpitz and Bismarck, which by the way have identical numbers. Therefore, I'd suggest that the only difference can be in the numbers already given, which would and most likely will make Gneisenau inferior.

 

And those numbers in the wiki are not data minded but officlal as fast as I know.

 

[fnord_disc]

 

You are aware that Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were sister ships, aren't you? This means that thy should be (nearly) identical with the same armor model. Just like Tirpitz and Bismarck, which by the way have identical numbers. Therefore, I'd suggest that the only difference can be in the numbers already given, which would and most likely will make Gneisenau inferior.

 

And those numbers in the wiki are not data minded but officlal as fast as I know.

 

 

No, that's not how it works. I tried explaining it in the other topic too, but I guess I'll do it again. It doesn't matter that they're sister ships. This has nothing to do with history at all, only with programming.

 

The values on the wiki are exported from the ingame armor model using the script that also generates values for the API. There is no human being looking at the armor model and writing out the values that seem most sensible to him. It's completely automated. But for the script to know where it has to look, every armor layer in the game has to be allocated to a group, such as citadel, belt, casemates, superstructure, torpedo belt... If you look at GM3D, you can see that in the labels assigned to the armor plates, but GM3D sometimes fails at exporting the correct labels, so don't trust them too much. The script can easily get confused if the way the game groups armor layers is different between Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, and this would easily happen if a different 3D artist did Gneisenau's armor scheme. So even if the two ships have exactly the same armor, the script might give completely different values if the armor groups are funky. And even if the script gives the same values, it doesn't mean the armor is actually the same, or has the same thickness.

 

The values displayed in the port and on the wiki are "official" in the sense that they put there by Wargaming and based on the ingame values, but the process by which they are put there is full of error sources and never checked by a human being. The numbers are meaningless for any kind of reliable discussion.

 

How about this? I will bet you 5€, payable via PayPal, that Gneisenau has 350mm maximum belt armor in the game. Winner is determined by checking the datamined armor model on GM3D whenever it is put up.

 

edit:

If you want to see one of the many examples where the wiki is wrong already, look at Wyoming's armor scheme

 

http://gamemodels3d.com/worldofwarships/vehicles/pasb004

 

If you click through the armor layers, you can see that the only area on the ship that has 305mm are the turret faces. The belt has 279mm and 292mm is the conning tower. Yet the wiki claims that Wyoming has 305mm of citadel armor, even though both the datamined armor model says 279mm and the historical blueprints. Wyoming did not, historically, have 305mm of belt armor.

 

The armor values that UI and the wiki tell you are meaningless.

[Bellegar]

The armor values that UI and the wiki tell you are meaningless.

 

I wish to add one more sentence to this: this also makes any discussion about it completely pointless. Yes, it is annoying we don't have the proper values, and yes, the values we currently have do not favour the German ships.

But the numbers are wrong, so there is no point in discussing them. Every discussion about them is pointless because it is based on numbers that are wrong and as such have absolutely no meaning at all.

[TheIdesOfMarch93]

I ran up against a Supertester sailing the T10 Großer Kurfürst battleship in a random match when I was in my Montana. I can say for a fact that she's going to be a pile of trouble because her armor is insanely strong. Even at barely over 15km ranges plunging fire does nothing to her (considering the fact that I can citadel Montanas at 20+km with my Montana) and anything less than 15km you only end up doing normal penetration alpha damage without citadels. She's the new Tirpitz of the game and I expect a lot of frustration from battleship players when it comes to fighting against her. As usual with any battleship you can kill them most reliably with fire and flooding, and that is where the size of the Großer Kurfürst puts her at a severe disadvantage because she can't avoid incoming fire nor torpedoes easily with her bulk. 

 

In short, Großer Kurfürst feels like someone combined a Yamato's armor with a Montana's guns. Very nasty combination, but also very attractive for players to work up to! 

[Darth_Glorious]

I ran up against a Supertester sailing the T10 Großer Kurfürst battleship in a random match when I was in my Montana. I can say for a fact that she's going to be a pile of trouble because her armor is insanely strong. Even at barely over 15km ranges plunging fire does nothing to her (considering the fact that I can citadel Montanas at 20+km with my Montana) and anything less than 15km you only end up doing normal penetration alpha damage without citadels. She's the new Tirpitz of the game and I expect a lot of frustration from battleship players when it comes to fighting against her. As usual with any battleship you can kill them most reliably with fire and flooding, and that is where the size of the Großer Kurfürst puts her at a severe disadvantage because she can't avoid incoming fire nor torpedoes easily with her bulk. 

 

In short, Großer Kurfürst feels like someone combined a Yamato's armor with a Montana's guns. Very nasty combination, but also very attractive for players to work up to! 

 

See?  Except the stupidly weak turrets and the firing angle, GK is fine :v

[GrossadmiralThrawn]

problem is: getting hit and tanking damage doesnt get you anything... so if the turrets drop like flies VS other BBs (and maybe the guns wont cut it...) all you have is one big ramm... and i doubt anybody would really play a BB in whcih you wont make anything until you ram an enemy...

[Poster_2015]

I ran up against a Supertester sailing the T10 Großer Kurfürst battleship in a random match when I was in my Montana. I can say for a fact that she's going to be a pile of trouble because her armor is insanely strong. Even at barely over 15km ranges plunging fire does nothing to her (considering the fact that I can citadel Montanas at 20+km with my Montana) and anything less than 15km you only end up doing normal penetration alpha damage without citadels. She's the new Tirpitz of the game and I expect a lot of frustration from battleship players when it comes to fighting against her. As usual with any battleship you can kill them most reliably with fire and flooding, and that is where the size of the Großer Kurfürst puts her at a severe disadvantage because she can't avoid incoming fire nor torpedoes easily with her bulk. 

 

In short, Großer Kurfürst feels like someone combined a Yamato's armor with a Montana's guns. Very nasty combination, but also very attractive for players to work up to! 

 

Lack of citadel penetration isnt all that great. Tirpitz armor is good, but not particularly great either. Sure you get less citadels, you get way more full penetrations though. Shooting a broadside NC gives me lets say 2 citadels a penetration an overpen and rest ding misses. If he gets 6 normal pens in return its more or less same damage. Im not saying the armor is weak, but in fact i prefer shooting at tirpitzes over other t8 BBs because i feel like my damage is more reliable. For me the turtleback armor is mostly superior on cruisers - where its generally citadel or overpen. On BBs it means you take around same damage at short range (assuming people shoot a bit higher then normal - which you should do vs tirpitz), but more plunging fire damage. 

[Darth_Glorious]

The strong point of getting only normal pens is that you can regenerate your health pool better by repair party (50% HP loss from normal pen vs 10% HP loss from citadel hit)

GK will get the most from Jack of all trades perk.

[GrossadmiralThrawn]

 

GK will get the most from Jack of all trades perk.

 

taking this on the other hand takes oujt the possibility of buffing your other presumed strenght: Secondary artillery... because the manual secs is also a 5 points skill... and tanking damage with 2 of 4 turrets destroyed up til that point... being a tank but disarmed will most likely not be a good way ot break even

[Darth_Glorious]

 

taking this on the other hand takes oujt the possibility of buffing your other presumed strenght: Secondary artillery... because the manual secs is also a 5 points skill... and tanking damage with 2 of 4 turrets destroyed up til that point... being a tank but disarmed will most likely not be a good way ot break even

 

128 mm secondary guns are easy to blow up by DD or CA HE shells :v so you can get to the situation that you don't have any secondary gun left as all :v

[GrossadmiralThrawn]

 

128 mm secondary guns is easy to blow up by DD or CA HE shells :v so you can get to the situation that you don't have any secondary gun left as all :v

 

one presumed strength less... not good so far for the GK.... just survivability wont make it fun to play if it means next to nothing VS DDs (thanks to terrible Torp protectioN) and no turrets left after a few salvos + nearly no way to retreat to repai

[BuccaneerBill]

 

Lack of citadel penetration isnt all that great. Tirpitz armor is good, but not particularly great either. Sure you get less citadels, you get way more full penetrations though. Shooting a broadside NC gives me lets say 2 citadels a penetration an overpen and rest ding misses. If he gets 6 normal pens in return its more or less same damage. Im not saying the armor is weak, but in fact i prefer shooting at tirpitzes over other t8 BBs because i feel like my damage is more reliable. For me the turtleback armor is mostly superior on cruisers - where its generally citadel or overpen. On BBs it means you take around same damage at short range (assuming people shoot a bit higher then normal - which you should do vs tirpitz), but more plunging fire damage. 

 

You can't repair citadel's though so their is a huge difference.

[1MajorKoenig]

On 7/20/2016 at 7:21 AM, Xeiki said:

Hm, now that i see those photos .... something looks awefully off about those ships. I guess I have to see them ingame, but .... they just don't look right. Guess my hype is now completely gone.

 

Tier IX and X are just plain ugly, and the WW1 ships look off. Those rebuilds are .... .... not impressive in the slightest. Even Bayern barely looks like herself somehow. I mean, they can do it. König Alber, Scharnhorst, Tirpitz, Bismarck, those are fine and detailed. The rest ... Meh. They lack the german "spirit". This is hard to describe, but each nation has a special "aura" surrounding their ships, and while they got it about right with the ships ingame (safe for Montana, she is just ugly, she just looks like a broader Iowa), and for most of the ships and especially the rebuilds they completely botched it. I guess they are still worked on, and maybe this is not their final apperance, and Yorck turned out fine even though she is a paper design. But just look at those american funnels on Kaiser and König.... Bah. And that stupendously blocky bridge on Friedrich der Große. The conning tower is about 5 meters to high, and those windows on the bridge...

 

To be fair, it is hard to design german ships. I model ships myself, and it is really hard to get the feeling right. But maybe I am just overcritical. I guess I have just seen too many fotographs of german ships to not recognise errors.

 

I attach some pictures of how I envision a german built WW1 ship (in this case a personal take on GK4542 mixed with some elements of L 20 e Alpha) in a 1945 outfit:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

This one actually looks much better than WG‘s (insert any rude word which shows disapproval) trials to Refit these ships.

 

Do you have more of these models by chance?