Royal BB line

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

yeah. scharnhorst was way too big opportunity for the cash...there is not as much hype about any of the KGV class so maybe the situation will be different after all

 

edit: i would really love to see how much money each premium ship earned

 

KGV at Tier 8 though, with 14" guns would be the most useless ship going. It would need 15" at least to make that tier which I'm not a big fan off, unless they add the original guns at Tier 7, espiecally since the 14" guns had 100mm less penetration than the 11" guns of the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau.

[piritskenyer]

 

KGV at Tier 8 though, with 14" guns would be the most useless ship going. It would need 15" at least to make that tier which I'm not a big fan off, unless they add the original guns at Tier 7, espiecally since the 14" guns had 100mm less penetration than the 11" guns of the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau.

 

Only you're wrong again. 

At 0 yards (point blank) 

• 14"/45 Mk VII: 28.7"
• 283mm/54,5 SK C/34: 23.7"

At 6ky (~5,5 km) 

• 14"/45 Mk VII: 23.9"
• 283mm/54,5 SK C/34: 18.9"

At 10ky (~9 km) 

• 14"/45 Mk VII: 20.9"
• 283mm/54,5 SK C/34: 15.9"

At 16ky (~14,5 km) 

• 14"/45 Mk VII: 17.3"
• 283mm/54,5 SK C/34: 12.5"

At 20ky (~18,2 km) 

• 14"/45 Mk VII: 15.3"
• 283mm/54,5 SK C/34: 10.5"

 

Point at the place where the 283mm has better penetration please. 

[KuroNyra]

The only trolls are the people that want to see it overtiered.

 

I KNEW there as a reason you already are present in my ignore list!

And considering the last time I went to the English section of the forum was about a year ago minimum safe for a small trip a week or two.

 

 

Seriously, you should just close your mouth and stop embarrassing yourself even more. Your source clearly aren't correct nor is your "logic" here.

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

I KNEW there as a reason you already are present in my ignore list!

And considering the last time I went to the English section of the forum was about a year ago minimum safe for a small trip a week or two.

 

 

Seriously, you should just close your mouth and stop embarrassing yourself even more. Your source clearly aren't correct nor is your "logic" here.

Navweps is a great source actually and the only embarrassment are the people still wanting this at tier 8

[KuroNyra]

Navweps is a great source actually and the only embarrassment are the people still wanting this at tier 8

 

I only see one embarrassement here bro'. And you are it. The KGV in tier 7 would be just too much. It would be placing the KV-2 at tier 5 in World of Tank, it was the case during a long time, it was not a surprise that that tank dominated the Tier V battle for the too long period he was in. (Freaking stupid 107gun! My M3 Lee is still scared when he see a KV rolling on the street.!)

 

 

 

[creamgravy]

You could balance Yamato for tier 2 in this game.

[SeaMonsterUK]

Nope.  The embarrassments are those wanting to overtier a ship solely based on armour, without looking at the gun,  which is inferior to the guns on the North Carolina,  Bismarck and Amagi class ships.

 

At tier 8, this ship will be completely outclassed.

[SeaMonsterUK]

You could balance Yamato for tier 2 in this game.

 

Which one? In either case both Yamatos wouldn't be tier 2, as one would be inadequate and the other too overwhelming in both armour and firepower 

[SmartassNoob]

The guns are as good as the game programing says they are. If the game files are edited to say that a specific 60 mm DD gun has "over 9000 power", then the tier 1 DD will one hit kill your Yamato.

[SeaMonsterUK]

The guns are as good as the game programing says they are. If the game files are edited to say that a specific 60 mm DD gun has "over 9000 power", then the tier 1 DD will one hit kill your Yamato.

 

Which ruins any chance of proper balancing or immersion.

[KuroNyra]

You could balance Yamato for tier 2 in this game.

 

That woudl be a bit too much.

The idea is still having ships "similar" at the same level. The same way goes for WTank et WWarplanes.

The idea is immersion: if something just look completly awkward it destroy. A game can be immersing without being realist. That's wath WG does.

 

Nope.  The embarrassments are those wanting to overtier a ship solely based on armour, without looking at the gun,  which is inferior to the guns on the North Carolina,  Bismarck and Amagi class ships.

 

At tier 8, this ship will be completely outclassed.

 

And during that time, I believe others ship in toher tier have not all the same size of guns. Still all of them can actually hold there own via different ways.

 

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

That woudl be a bit too much.

The idea is still having ships "similar" at the same level. The same way goes for WTank et WWarplanes.

 

 

 

And during that time, I believe others ship in toher tier have not all the same size of guns. Still all of them can actually hold there own via different ways.

 

 

And none of those battleships have guns smaller than 15" in terms of main armament. A 14" gun at Tier 8 is inadequate at best.

[Earl_of_Northesk]

Navweps is a great source actually and the only embarrassment are the people still wanting this at tier 8

 

It actually is.

 

Only you're wrong again. 

At 0 yards (point blank) 

• 14"/45 Mk VII: 28.7"
• 283mm/54,5 SK C/34: 23.7"

At 6ky (~5,5 km) 

• 14"/45 Mk VII: 23.9"
• 283mm/54,5 SK C/34: 18.9"

At 10ky (~9 km) 

• 14"/45 Mk VII: 20.9"
• 283mm/54,5 SK C/34: 15.9"

At 16ky (~14,5 km) 

• 14"/45 Mk VII: 17.3"
• 283mm/54,5 SK C/34: 12.5"

At 20ky (~18,2 km) 

• 14"/45 Mk VII: 15.3"
• 283mm/54,5 SK C/34: 10.5"

 

Point at the place where the 283mm has better penetration please. 

 

So please answer to this post. Because the source you mentioned but  probably have never looked at completely contradicts your argument

[piritskenyer]

Navweps is a great source actually and the only embarrassment are the people still wanting this at tier 8

 

You do realise that I just used navweaps to disprove what you said, as I have already done so multiple times. 

You are a disgrace in terms of sensible, constructed and constructive argument, basically sweeping off any argument presentwd against your point, and repeating the same things, believing that if you do so you'll eventually be right, which is not gonna come. 

Honestly, I don't even know what you are doing here, as you have been disproved on multiple points, in multiple ways by multiple people who are all more knowledgeable than you. 

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

It actually is.

 

So please answer to this post. Because the source you mentioned but  probably have never looked at completely contradicts your argument

 

0 yards (0 m)	26.9" (668 mm)	---
10,000 yards (9,144 m)	15.6" (396 mm)	1.15" (29 mm)
15,000 yards (13,716 m)	13.2" (335 mm)	1.95" (50 mm)
20,000 yards (18,288 m)	11.2" (285 mm)	2.85" (73 mm)
25,000 yards (22,860 m)	9.5" (241 mm)	4.00" (102 mm)
28,000 yards (25,603 m)	---	4.75" (121 mm)

 

0 yards (0 m)	23.79" (604 mm)	---
8,640 yards (7,900 m)	18.09" (460 mm)	0.76" (19 mm)
16,514 yards (15,100 m)	13.18" (335 mm)	1.63" (41 mm)
20,013 yards (18,288 m)	11.47" (291 mm)	1.87" (48 mm)
30,000 yards (27,432 m)	8.08" (205 mm)	2.99" (76 mm)

 

 

Really?

 

KGV is only better Point blank and at extreme range, but not so good in between and along the deck. My statement still stands

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

You do realise that I just used navweaps to disprove what you said, as I have already done so multiple times. 

You are a disgrace in terms of sensible, constructed and constructive argument, basically sweeping off any argument presentwd against your point, and repeating the same things, believing that if you do so you'll eventually be right, which is not gonna come. 

Honestly, I don't even know what you are doing here, as you have been disproved on multiple points, in multiple ways by multiple people who are all more knowledgeable than you. 

 

And as I said, at least I'm not a complete d*ck. And I've used the same source as you can see above.

[Earl_of_Northesk]

 

0 yards (0 m)	26.9" (668 mm)	---
10,000 yards (9,144 m)	15.6" (396 mm)	1.15" (29 mm)
15,000 yards (13,716 m)	13.2" (335 mm)	1.95" (50 mm)
20,000 yards (18,288 m)	11.2" (285 mm)	2.85" (73 mm)
25,000 yards (22,860 m)	9.5" (241 mm)	4.00" (102 mm)
28,000 yards (25,603 m)	---	4.75" (121 mm)

 

0 yards (0 m)	23.79" (604 mm)	---
8,640 yards (7,900 m)	18.09" (460 mm)	0.76" (19 mm)
16,514 yards (15,100 m)	13.18" (335 mm)	1.63" (41 mm)
20,013 yards (18,288 m)	11.47" (291 mm)	1.87" (48 mm)
30,000 yards (27,432 m)	8.08" (205 mm)	2.99" (76 mm)

 

 

Really?

 

KGV is only better Point blank and at extreme range, but not so good in between and along the deck. My statement still stands

 

Last page you said that the Scharnhorst guns have 100mm more peneration. Then you go on posting a table showing that KGV's guns are superior at any range. So how the [edited]does your statement still stand?

[Earl_of_Northesk]

 

KGV at Tier 8 though, with 14" guns would be the most useless ship going. It would need 15" at least to make that tier which I'm not a big fan off, unless they add the original guns at Tier 7, espiecally since the 14" guns had 100mm less penetration than the 11" guns of the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau.

 

Just so you can't edit that out...

[SeaMonsterUK]

16"/45 MArk 6

0 yards (0 m)	29.74" (755 mm)	---	2,300 fps (701 mps)	0.0
5,000 yards (4,572 m)	26.60" (676 mm)	0.76" (19 mm)	2,090 fps (637 mps)	3.0
10,000 yards (9,144 m)	23.51" (597 mm)	1.87" (28 mm)	1,900 fps (579 mps)	6.8
15,000 yards (13,716 m)	20.47" (520 mm)	3.04" (77 mm)	1,743 fps (529 mps)	11.7
20,000 yards (18,288 m)	17.62" (448 mm)	4.29" (109 mm)	1,604 fps (489 mps)	17.9
25,000 yards (22,860 m)	15.05" (382 mm)	5.76" (146 mm)	1,521 fps (463 mps)	25.4
30,000 yards (27,432 m)	12.77" (324 mm)	7.62" (194 mm)	1,490 fps (454 mps)	34.1
35,000 yards (32,004 m)	10.49" (266 mm)	10.57" (268 mm)	1,531 fps (488 mps)	45.2

 

 

38cm SK C/34

0 yards (0 m)	29.23" (742 mm)	---
5,000 yards (4,572 m)	24.26" (616 mm)	0.76" (19.3 mm)
19,685 yards (18,000 m)	16.50" (419 mm)	2.96" (75.0 mm)
24,060 yards (22,000 m)	15.49" (393 mm)	4.15" (104 mm)
29,528 yards (27,000 m)	11.98" (304 mm)	5.02" (126 mm)

 

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

Just so you can't edit that out...

 

Couldn't careless.

[piritskenyer]

 

Couldn't careless.

 

 

And as I said, at least I'm not a complete d*ck. And I've used the same source as you can see above.

 

Not a complete d1ck are you? You are a condescending and annoying [edited], who is, above all, wrong. You are not only wrong, but you also refuse to admit so when you are disproved, and you then ignore evidence disproving you. 

 

And if you "don't even care", why are you even here? 

 

If you say navweaps is a great and reliable resource why don't you accept the evidence taken from it and presented here? 

 

I swear to the f**king gods, the only valid thing coming from you in this thread is the part in your signature about duct tape. 

[zFireWyvern]

at least I'm not a complete d*ck.

[anonym_MfZ6T7iwWpUC]

Wow, not surprised this topic has gone t1ts up. I only have two point to make regarding the KGV class.

 

1) I want this ship in game as it existed. No imaginary upgrades. 10x14" guns.

 

2) I couldn't care less what tier it ends up at, 7 or 8. I will still want to play it.

 

Personally, I think it will work fine at 8. But that's just my opinion.

[SeaMonsterUK]

Wow, not surprised this topic has gone t1ts up. I only have two point to make regarding the KGV class.

 

1) I want this ship in game as it existed. No imaginary upgrades. 10x14" guns.

 

2) I couldn't care less what tier it ends up at, 7 or 8. I will still want to play it.

 

Personally, I think it will work fine at 8. But that's just my opinion.

 

Not completely imaginary, just non existent on the ships that were completed.

 

To paraphrase: The original proposal for the KGV class was to have 3x3 15" guns

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

 

Not a complete d1ck are you? You are a condescending and annoying [edited], who is, above all, wrong. You are not only wrong, but you also refuse to admit so when you are disproved, and you then ignore evidence disproving you. 

 

And if you "don't even care", why are you even here? 

 

If you say navweaps is a great and reliable resource why don't you accept the evidence taken from it and presented here? 

 

I swear to the f**king gods, the only valid thing coming from you in this thread is the part in your signature about duct tape. 

 

Quite harsh words considering they are coming from you.

 

KGV, considering both guns and armour, is tier 7, the sooner you realise that, which will take a couple of centuries (which is a awfully optimistic), the better.