Royal BB line

[SeaMonsterUK]

Because you guys have put in logic, knowledge and research instead of repeating *one* thing over and over again. Also, you guys are knowledgeable, and thus are on a higher level in my eyes when it comes to discussion.

 

And you haven't even proven it would be overpowered at tier 7 despite several claiming it would be based on their flawed knowledge of the armour scheme of the KGV.

 

[anonym_MfZ6T7iwWpUC]

I apologise if this has already been covered in the previous 63 pages.

 

Briefly, how does the KGV's armour scheme compare to Nagato, Amagi, Colorado & North Carolina? Where does it sit? Is it a 7.5, or is it closer to 7?

 

Onto tier 4. No matter if its Centurion or Orion, it will have a main gun caliber advantage (13.5" against 12"), but the Kaisers secondaries will have the advantage (5.9" against 4"), could that not potentially be the more important  advantage?

[SeaMonsterUK]

I apologise if this has already been covered in the previous 63 pages.

 

Briefly, how does the KGV's armour scheme compare to Nagato, Amagi, Colorado & North Carolina? Where does it sit? Is it a 7.5, or is it closer to 7?

 

Onto tier 4. No matter if its Centurion or Orion, it will have a main gun caliber advantage (13.5" against 12"), but the Kaisers secondaries will have the advantage (5.9" against 4"), could that not potentially be the more important  advantage?

 

Belt armour, overall is better on KGV, North Carolina beats it in Deck armour iirc, NC had a max of 7" which was split between 4 decks. Compared to the German ships such as Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, both have 14" belts, were KGV has between 14.71" around Magazine and 13.75" around machinery and boilers, so KGV has less armour amidships than the two German Battleships.

 

As for early tier 4: I'd say early advantage maybe in main guns, I've rarely seen the BB's trying to get close to each other.

[Trainspite]

HMS Vanguard will likely either be a premium, or come in at tier 8 after the KGV and leading onto the Lion-class, so I can see it being in the standard tech tree itself. Since we are also looking for unique tier 10's, Lion 1944 will be it, with 3x3 16" Mark IV guns in 3 Mark III turrets.

 

Probably a tier 8 premium considering she is fairly unique and famous. And there are other options for the tier 8 in a fast BB line. 

 

 

And you haven't even proven it would be overpowered at tier 7 despite several claiming it would be based on their flawed knowledge of the armour scheme of the KGV.

 

 

 

And nor have you proven that she would be underpowered at tier 8. Despite not knowing what her guns are exactly capable of, or how she would work in game situations at either tier. What you say works both ways remember, no one here is infallible, not even you. 

 

Despite all the figures being thrown around it is highly subjective, as to how you look at it. And I don't view the KGVs as inferior to their contemparies (Bismarck, Littorio, Richelieu, North Carolina), while you obviously do, which is probably the main difference. I would hope it can be left at that. 

 

And moving onto the tier 4s, it is likely that Orion or Colossus would receive a fictional upgrade, so they may resemble the R class at the final hull. I don't think it is ideal to have a QA Mansion at tier 4, or that likely. 

[SeaMonsterUK]

HMS Queen Mary is another possible premium likely around Tier 4.

 

 

Her armament consists of 4x2 BL 13.5" Mark 5 guns, 16x1 BL4" Mk VII guns, and the addition of QF-6 Pounder Hotchkiss and QF 3" 20cwt High angle guns from October 1914.

[anonym_MfZ6T7iwWpUC]

As for early tier 4: I'd say early advantage maybe in main guns, I've rarely seen the BB's trying to get close to each other.

 

That's true, but I was more thinking about cruisers and DD's that get a little too close rather than other BB's.

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

That's true, but I was more thinking about cruisers and DD's that get a little too close rather than other BB's.

 

Kaiser would be superior in Secondaries, besides that KGV has it's secondaries reorganised so most is in the frontal arc of the ship.

[mr3awsome]

At this point I think Tano may have an unhealthy obsession. 

 

Trainspite, on 16 February 2017 - 08:56 PM, said:

Nah, I think mr3awsome is referencing choosing between the two front-runners for the tier 4 in the first RN BB line. Those candidates being Orion, and Colossus. 

This. 

 

Centurion is a poor choice of tier IV regular, because pretty much the only difference between the KGVs & Iron Dukes is the secondaries. 

Colossus is a possibility, but given how poor the 12"/50 Mk XI compares to the German 30.5cm/50 SK L/50, plus the inferior armour vs Kaiser, its not a particularly appetising choice. 

It probably compares best to Helgoland & Florida, which are both notably absent.

 

Which leaves Orion. 

 

So other discussion points;

- Tier 4 BB choices.

- Names for Paper ships. 

- Preferred premium camouflage options.

- Consumables, unique traits and feel of the lines.

- Potential Premiums. 

Given the large number of pre Dreadnoughts built, the options for names is a long list. 

 

Premiums is also quite a wide realm of possibility, and something that is probably worth looking further into. 

 

[SeaMonsterUK]

At this point I think Tano may have an unhealthy obsession. 

I don't have any kind of obsession.

Centurion is a poor choice of tier IV regular, because pretty much the only difference between the KGVs & Iron Dukes is the secondaries. 

Colossus is a possibility, but given how poor the 12"/50 Mk XI compares to the German 30.5cm/50 SK L/50, plus the inferior armour vs Kaiser, its not a particularly appetising choice. 

It probably compares best to Helgoland & Florida, which are both notably absent.

 

Which leaves Orion. 

And Armour, the Centurion, like other KGV's, don't have the same armour layout as the Iron Duke, and Iron Duke is also heavier, 23'400 tons (25'000 tons for Ajax) vs 29'500 tons and being 0.25 knots faster. Though it should be noted that Centurion was able to achieve 22.5 knots.

 

Edit: Still doing some research on the KGV 1911, so weight in tonnage has been added for Ajax

Edit 2: Correcting above edit

[sharpie65]

For the Tier 4 BB, I would be inclined to say the Colossus-class battleships - their armour went back to the same configuration and thickness as HMS Dreadnought due to the Kaiserliche Marine making 12" the new standard for their capital ships. Dependent on what tier the super-dreadnoughts appear, I would also say the Orion-class (due to their bigger guns, they may be better suited to T5 when/if a slow/fast battleship/battlecruiser split comes along).

[Trainspite]

HMS Queen Mary is another possible premium likely around Tier 4.

 

~snip~

 

 

Her armament consists of 4x2 BL 13.5" Mark 5 guns, 16x1 BL4" Mk VII guns, and the addition of QF-6 Pounder Hotchkiss and QF 3" 20cwt High angle guns from October 1914.

 

I would consider her more than possible, I really wish that they do model her and Seydlitz together though, as joint tier 4 premiums. 

 

This nice model was in the Jutland exhibition at the National Maritime museum. She was pretty impressive when looking close up I must say.

 

 

 

 

[mr3awsome]

This nice model was in the Jutland exhibition at the National Maritime museum. 

The Bells Esmeralda, the Bells!

 

Chipmunk_of_Vengeance, on 17 February 2017 - 04:18 PM, said:

I don't have any kind of obsession.

At least you agree its unhealthy. 

 

And Armour, the Centurion, like other KGV's, don't have the same armour layout as the Iron Duke, and Iron Duke is also heavier, 23'400 tons (25'000 tons for Ajax) vs 29'500 tons and being 0.25 knots faster. Though it should be noted that Centurion was able to achieve 22.5 knots.

I think the only differences in armour are in relation to the change in secondaries. 

Design speed is the same. 

Orion is the same, but at least it has weaker guns. 

 

[SeaMonsterUK]

I think the only differences in armour are in relation to the change in secondaries. 

Design speed is the same. 

Orion is the same, but at least it has weaker guns. 

 

Orion, King George V and Iron Duke use the same BL 13.5" guns.

[mr3awsome]

Orion, King George V and Iron Duke use the same BL 13.5" guns.

 

They all used the 13.5"/45 Mk V. 

 

However, Orion fired lighter shells, 574.5kg initially, 570.2kg later, at 787mps. 

KGV & Iron Duke, however, fired a heavier 635.0kg, later 639.6kg shell at 759mps. 

What this means is that KGV & Iron Duke have a penetrative edge over Orion. 

 

The same applies to Lion vs Queen Mary & Tiger. 

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

They all used the 13.5"/45 Mk V. 

 

However, Orion fired lighter shells, 574.5kg initially, 570.2kg later, at 787mps. 

KGV & Iron Duke, however, fired a heavier 635.0kg, later 639.6kg shell at 759mps. 

What this means is that KGV & Iron Duke have a penetrative edge over Orion. 

 

The same applies to Lion vs Queen Mary & Tiger. 

 

I did mention few pages about the heavier shell.

[SeaMonsterUK]

Another possible premium, HMS Erin, it's the only Royal Navy ship used that was armed with the BL 13.5" Mark VI guns, as only 10 guns of that mark was ever made, and if the gun ever needed replacing they just replaced it with a Mark V with a special propellent charge.

 

[SmartassNoob]

That ship is about the same as the New York. It could have easily been so much more powerful with a few minor changes:

• Look how close the chimneys are to each other. Redirect the second one into the first. This frees up a little extra space there. I'll get to why they'd need it.
• What's with the small building between turrets 3 and 4? It's obviously blocking turret 4! Move that building to where the rear chimney used to be. Now turret 4 can shoot forward at a much steeper angle and can even do a 360 degree turn (which is vital when you're the attacking side).
• Now let's look at turret 3. What idiot decided to put it there? Yeah, it can shoot backwards, past turret 4 a little better, but what's with the running away mentality? The small building would still block it so much that turrets 1 and 2 probably have about the same angles! Move turret 3 backwards so much that it could narrowly do a 360 degree turn. This way turret 4 would still be unable to fire forward at a good angle, but turret 3 could now take that role. And done!  Turrets 3 and 4 could now both make 360 degree turns with no extra expense/complexity to anything! Their guns would have to be lifted up when passing the nearest turrets. The ships engine that might be between turrets 3 and 4 might just have to be moved between the chimney and turret 3, but the ships added combat effectiveness would be well worth it.

 

Yes, I'm a qualified battleship designer! 

[SeaMonsterUK]

That ship is about the same as the New York. It could have easily been so much more powerful with a few minor changes:

• Look how close the chimneys are to each other. Redirect the second one into the first. This frees up a little extra space there. I'll get to why they'd need it.
• What's with the small building between turrets 3 and 4? It's obviously blocking turret 4! Move that building to where the rear chimney used to be. Now turret 4 can shoot forward at a much steeper angle and can even do a 360 degree turn (which is vital when you're the attacking side).
• Now let's look at turret 3. What idiot decided to put it there? Yeah, it can shoot backwards, past turret 4 a little better, but what's with the running away mentality? The small building would still block it so much that turrets 1 and 2 probably have about the same angles! Move turret 3 backwards so much that it could narrowly do a 360 degree turn. This way turret 4 would still be unable to fire forward at a good angle, but turret 3 could now take that role. And done!  Turrets 3 and 4 could now both make 360 degree turns with no extra expense/complexity to anything! Their guns would have to be lifted up when passing the nearest turrets. The ships engine that might be between turrets 3 and 4 might just have to be moved between the chimney and turret 3, but the ships added combat effectiveness would be well worth it.

 

Yes, I'm a qualified battleship designer! 

 

That structure between Turrets 3 and 4 is the fire control station iirc.

[SmartassNoob]

Probably yes. Doesn't change anything.

[SeaMonsterUK]

Probably yes. Doesn't change anything.

 

Actually it does because it reduces the effectiveness of turrets 3, 4 and 5 if it were moved or removed.

[SmartassNoob]

How would it do that just by being forward of turret 3? Its field of vision would still be the same (for the purposes of turrets 3 to 5) and the chimney is taller than it and could be made even taller, if you're worried about smoke.

[SeaMonsterUK]

How would it do that just by being forward of turret 3? Its field of vision would still be the same (for the purposes of turrets 3 to 5) and the chimney is taller than it and could be made even taller, if you're worried about smoke.

 

Fire direction, it's position makes it perfect for directing all 3 turrets.

[SmartassNoob]

You're not making any sense at all. Why is that? Did the guys in there communicate orders to the turrets by shouting? As I said before: Its field of vision would still be the same (for the purposes of turrets 3 to 5) and the chimney is taller than it and could be made even taller, if you're worried about smoke.

 

[SeaMonsterUK]

You're not making any sense at all. Why is that? Did the guys in there communicate orders to the turrets by shouting? As I said before: Its field of vision would still be the same (for the purposes of turrets 3 to 5) and the chimney is taller than it and could be made even taller, if you're worried about smoke.

 

Nothing to do with smoke but strategic positioning.

[SmartassNoob]

In other words no good reason. Someone just felt like it.