Is Warspite Broken?

[ViceAdmiralKevin]

I use Warspite very often and I like the ships play style. But a week ago some one said that the ship has a armour Broke.

It tells me almost nothing else that there is something wrong with the ship's armor. But I have no evidence that it is true or not, I do very rarely missplays. I have even tested and let myself geting hits full brodside from a Kongo and New York and I take a lot of damage, something I would expect although the warspites citadel is max 330 mm. 

 

So my question is there something wrong with this British warships? 

 

[nothere01]

it was fixed in the latest patch, it was sitting too high on the water

[ammattimies]

It always took too many normal AP penetrations from all directions imo, although the citadel is apparently hard to penetrate. I paid 50€ for my Warspite when it became available for the first time and it must have been the worst investment I ever made. I strongly advise against buying it!

[Deckeru_Maiku]

I use Warspite very often and I like the ships play style. But a week ago some one said that the ship has a armour Broke.

It tells me almost nothing else that there is something wrong with the ship's armor. But I have no evidence that it is true or not, I do very rarely missplays. I have even tested and let myself geting hits full brodside from a Kongo and New York and I take a lot of damage, something I would expect although the warspites citadel is max 330 mm. 

 

So my question is there something wrong with this British warships? 

 

 

I'm playing my Warspite at least once per day and didn't notice any changes to the negative. Since 0.5.9 armour rather got better than worse.

 

It always took too many normal AP penetrations from all directions imo, although the citadel is apparently hard to penetrate. I paid 50€ for my Warspite when it became available for the first time and it must have been the worst investment I ever made. I strongly advise against buying it!

 

Hmmm... maybe LTP the Fat Lady? It needs some different play than the "ordinary" BBs.

[Anzio_Anzai]

What Warspite and Dunkerque have in common? They both premium ships and they both sux 

 

[ViceAdmiralKevin]

it was fixed in the latest patch, it was sitting too high on the water

 

Thank for answer mate  

[ViceAdmiralKevin]

It always took too many normal AP penetrations from all directions imo, although the citadel is apparently hard to penetrate. I paid 50€ for my Warspite when it became available for the first time and it must have been the worst investment I ever made. I strongly advise against buying it!

 

I'm sorry to hear that, I bought the ship first day it came in beta to mate. It is far from the best ship but it is okay.

[cherry2blost]

However....... the Grand Old Spiteful Lady.... who used to be my most played ship, has languished in Port for many months now - as the power creep from Newer Lines has broken her from the awesome thing that she once was.

Also Newer Premium ships of similar type have better characteristics than WS, she now no longer has sufficient range/ Camo/ Turret Rotation to compete with the likes of Arizona etc... not to mention the endless max range HE spam from Russian Cruiser both Line and Premium... her suscepitibilty to fire is her massive achilles heel along with Non Citadel Penetrations from ALL angles, her inability to relocate on larger maps and her now ridiculously long turret rotation when compared to similar ships... maybe makes it about the right time for WG to revisit this (very expensive) Grand old lady of the game... come on guys the game has moved a long way since CBT but Warspite has not........

[xXx_Blogis_xXx]

What Warspite and Dunkerque have in common? They both premium ships and they both sux 

 

u a bit wrong warspite is very good for t6 bb, if u play her right she does good dmg and citas , but she eats fire like crazy thats only mines with slow turret turn

[thestaggy]

In the last patch she was dropped lower in the water, so in my experience I take less citadel hits and I am dealing fewer of them to other Warspites. There is however a design ''weakness'' she has always had though and what you may be experiencing is the fact that she has a large, well-armoured superstructure. This means she eats a lot of 3k hits whereas something like New Mexico could get away with 1k over-penetrations.

 

My biggest gripe though, and it goes for all of my tier 6s, is the fact that I have been in an almost constant string of tier 8 battles for over a week now when I play her. It is an exercise in frustration taking a slow battleship with 16.3 km range in to a battle where the closest ship is 18 km away or there is an unspotted DD/CA that is burning you to death outside your range.

[JapLance]

it was fixed in the latest patch, it was sitting too high on the water

 

They can say whatever they want. I have the Warspite in my port and after the latest patch it has exactly the same draught as before.

[LilJumpa]

However....... the Grand Old Spiteful Lady.... who used to be my most played ship, has languished in Port for many months now - as the power creep from Newer Lines has broken her from the awesome thing that she once was.

Also Newer Premium ships of similar type have better characteristics than WS, she now no longer has sufficient range/ Camo/ Turret Rotation to compete with the likes of Arizona etc... not to mention the endless max range HE spam from Russian Cruiser both Line and Premium... her suscepitibilty to fire is her massive achilles heel along with Non Citadel Penetrations from ALL angles, her inability to relocate on larger maps and her now ridiculously long turret rotation when compared to similar ships... maybe makes it about the right time for WG to revisit this (very expensive) Grand old lady of the game... come on guys the game has moved a long way since CBT but Warspite has not........

 

Got her on April fools day 2016. Can't complain a single bit and she is definitely not broken or underpowered in the current T6 meta.

 

 

 

[Spuggy]

From what I understand Warspite suffers from some/many un-explainable weak spots. She has some areas where the armour is inexplicably thin (the flight deck is a prime example) which really should be far thicker. Her citadel also juts out forward of the A turret and is, for all intents and purposes, inexplicably un-armoured here. This is usually why people get so frustrated with her. She gets citadelled from the front easily and if you try to run away and show your flight deck you get fukked in the arse too.

 

It also doesn't help that she is made of tea bags and tinder and will burst into flames from a miss with armour piercing shells.

 

[RedStorm1]

. I have the Warspite in my port and after the latest patch it has exactly the same draught as before.

 

That is definitively  not the case.

 

Anyway, there are so many threads sbout Warspite and the changes since patch 0.5.9 with details about its armor.

 

Just go to ships/battleships and search for Warspite ....

[aboomination]

They can say whatever they want. I have the Warspite in my port and after the latest patch it has exactly the same draught as before.

 

Do you want to have a usable torpedo belt or a harder to hit citadel area? Can't have both 

 

 

 

ps: Yes - I noticed that the British didn't build the Campbeltown 

[Vanhal]

 

They can say whatever they want. I have the Warspite in my port and after the latest patch it has exactly the same draught as before.

 

The difference is like half meter, so it's totally unnoticeable. Idk if that changed the survivability, i didn't noticed anything of sorts, but may be. It still look like light load, while all ships in game should be battle load, because we only have battles.

Worse thing, the superstructure catching all damge is still here, as well as huge unarmored back, which cause every BB shell hit from the rear to citadel. Don't ever try to run in Warspite. Victory or death (most often victory and death, i don't think i have any other BB that have so low survive ratio).

[thestaggy]

Vanhal, on 15 August 2016 - 07:46 AM, said:

 

The difference is like half meter, so it's totally unnoticeable. Idk if that changed the survivability, i didn't noticed anything of sorts, but may be. It still look like light load, while all ships in game should be battle load, because we only have battles.

Worse thing, the superstructure catching all damge is still here, as well as huge unarmored back, which cause every BB shell hit from the rear to citadel. Don't ever try to run in Warspite. Victory or death (most often victory and death, i don't think i have any other BB that have so low survive ratio).

 

Pre-patch the citadel was slightly above the waterline. The changes should've put it slightly below the waterline, greatly improving durability.

 

 

 

Not much can be done about the superstructure though. That is by design. The ship features progressive all around armour so there is enough armour on the superstructure to trigger and detonate AP shells. Conversely, the New Mexico's all-or-nothing scheme has a thin superstructure that will allow most AP shells to overpen.

[VC381]

I got it thanks to the sale over the last few days and to be honest I regret not buying sooner. She does have a weakness in that she takes a lot of normal pen damage from BB AP, even well angled, and the 5s repair is a bit awkward with fires, but overall feels strong. I'm not sure about actual bugs with the armor, I think most were fixed. And guns are best in Tier at everything except how many of them you get, which hardly matters because they are pinpoint accurate. First game I got 5 citadels in 2 salvos, back to back deleted two cruisers from full HP.

[ilhilh]

I haven't been playing mine much for a long time but played 4-5 games in it over the weekend and it seems the same as it was with the deck coated in flammable liquid and you just bleed health from every hit... but 2 double citadels in 3 salvoes made me think the guns were still pretty decent

 

[Seikin]

The recent change gave a MASSIVE increase in survivability imho. It was dire before then, but the combination of lowering and armour remodelling have put here in a very good place

[VC381]

Also the superstructure thing doesn't quite make sense and people are misunderstanding the all-or-nothing concept. Warspite had progressively thinner armor belts on the hull, so she should take normal pens on the upper hull and on bow/stern. These are the areas the US ships left unarmored to save weight for the thicker citadel. But if we're talking about the hangar and bridge area, these should be overpens on both US ships and Warspite. She didn't have an armored hangar, most of that tall box bridge has only splinter protection except for a small conning tower.

 

So if she's taking full pen damage to the upper structure or citadels through the hangar that's just plain wrong.

[creamgravy]

http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/48276-warspites-armour/

 

[Blue_Bug]

What Warspite and Dunkerque have in common? They both premium ships and they both sux 

 

I never had good results on the Warspite. The Dunkerque I realy love. Both ships have in common that they need a special gameplay. I never understood the good reviews on the Warspite. Now I don't understand the negative feedback on the Dunkerque. It is a ship that fits my playstyle. 

 

I think people will love this ship or hate it. It is a pity that you can't try premiums out. I think it would be great if you could rent a premium for a day (one day only a premium). That way players could try the ship out and see if it fits his/her playstyle. IMHO there are only a few bad ships, for the rest it are ships that fits your playstyle or not.

 

 

[anonym_MfZ6T7iwWpUC]

 

I never had good results on the Warspite. The Dunkerque I realy love. Both ships have in common that they need a special gameplay. I never understood the good reviews on the Warspite. Now I don't understand the negative feedback on the Dunkerque. It is a ship that fits my playstyle. 

 

I think people will love this ship or hate it. It is a pity that you can't try premiums out. I think it would be great if you could rent a premium for a day (one day only a premium). That way players could try the ship out and see if it fits his/her playstyle. IMHO there are only a few bad ships, for the rest it are ships that fits your playstyle or not.

 

 

 

I think renting a premium for a day is a great idea. I am still undecided on getting the Dunkerque or the Scharnhorst, as I can only afford one. I pretty much change my mind on a daily basis.

[thestaggy]

Also the superstructure thing doesn't quite make sense and people are misunderstanding the all-or-nothing concept. Warspite had progressively thinner armor belts on the hull, so she should take normal pens on the upper hull and on bow/stern. These are the areas the US ships left unarmored to save weight for the thicker citadel. But if we're talking about the hangar and bridge area, these should be overpens on both US ships and Warspite. She didn't have an armored hangar, most of that tall box bridge has only splinter protection except for a small conning tower.

 

So if she's taking full pen damage to the upper structure or citadels through the hangar that's just plain wrong.

 

To correct myself it isn't the superstructure, but the upper hull is susceptible to triggering AP where a New Mexico likely would not. Hence some captains are still experiencing heavy hits when broadside. While equally thin, the larger superstructure is still liable to be hit more frequently than on the New Mexico.

 

We can compare the two armour models here: http://gamemodels3d.com/worldofwarships/vehicles/battleship

 

The New Mexico has next to no armour above its belt which ends slightly above the waterline. The Warspite has comparatively thicker ''casemate'' armour that extends almost all the way up to the deck. These are likely where the big damage, non-citadel hits are penetrating.

 

I have an equal amount of games in both BBs and they are my two most played ships and I must say, the Warspite takes more damage in my hands and I find other Warspites easier to damage than a New Mexico. She feels better post-patch, no doubt, but the New Mexico still strikes me as the tankier ship.