Guide: British Cruisers

[Capra76]

The thing about passive HE in smoke play is that it is 'no skill' but allows a player to feel he is still contributing

 

The thing is firing from smoke is very far from no skill and is IMO very hard to do well.

 

First off you need to make sure that someone else is spotting for you and that you're not going to obscure their view of the target, once you've done that you must understand that every torpedo within range is going to be launched in your direction so you must consider what ships out there could target you and whether the risk is worth it, finally if the enemy decides to charge into your smoke you're in a world of hurt so you must either have sufficient support or an exit strategy.

 

Any fool can do it badly, I've screwed it up plenty of times myself.

[Redgecohones]

I knew that was going to get me into trouble even with the  '  ' around it. I'm referring more to the perception than the reality.

 

Let me rephrase perhaps, HE, on the vast majority of ships (some 'are' more optimised for it, yes) is (or at least was) meant to mostly be a situational thing -  primarily a backup  when you are not in position to be using a more deadly choice until you are in a position to be using that more deadly choice, or for finishing off a low health target, especially when it is angled.

 

With the default meta, this situational choice has become for many ships, the only option they can default to which is often an 'inefficent' choice even while being the only effective one available to them.

 

Is that fair?

 

*Edit* i need to rephrase that probably, with the default meta more accurately i think i should say, ships are required to fall back on HE more often  than would be the most efficient use of their armament because they cannot easily get into a position to use that armament. (?)

[C4PT41N_0BV10US]

What I am trying to suggest to you is that you need to look at the bigger picture. I am not talking about catering to the lowest common denominator, I am talking about catering for the average, median player. That demographic MUST be where the core of the game is aimed at. I am not saying that more skilled players shouldn't also have their niches, options etc but should NEVER be at the expense of the core of players. In this case it would have been sensible to have a slightly more playable primary tree of RN cruisers, with a later second optional line with higher skill ceiling. You can add things for the better player without excluding the majority!

 

If you want to grow this game into a viable esport, the number one thing that you will need is a large, engaged and growing community. That is what sponsors are looking for and they will decide your viability. If you continue to feel like your whims are more important than that of the average Joe, you may end up with the game that you want, but the game that you want won't be where you want it to be. Please try to take that in before coming back at me, I am speaking from experience. Your content is all well and good, and you may argue that it adds to the to the engagement of the community and I agree with this. You need this kind of contribution, but NEVER ever feel like your opinion and wants are more important than those of the masses. They may be less informed, but funnily enough they are more important.

Oh, I am looking at the bigger picture! I have the feeling that you don't Because, up to this point, it was average Joe who was backed up by wargaming, and look where it got us. We have BB dominating, cause CV's were too hard for them to manage, so they nerfed them. DD were also too hard for them, so not only they were nerfed, but also cruiser radar was buffed (totally uncalled for buff) with halving radar consumable cooldown. Cruisers are becoming more and more subpar class. Higher tiers are already becoming more and more 5 BB 2 CA 5 DD games. Furthermore, average Joe couldn't make the strike CV work, cause it was harder then just random clicking and receiving citadels in BB's. So they nerfed them to the ground and introduced Fighter Decks, who nobody called for. Find me one skilled CV player, that wished FD's were introduced in the game. Even better, they nerf CV's even further, while still buffing Fighter Decks, and nobody still calls for that, apart from average Joe, who sails his BB, and doesn't want to be bothered by some planes and turning his ship once in a while.

And while game is slowly devolving into absolute crap, here we are, discussing should we heed average Joe more, or maybe not?

I don't know which game you're so successfull and devoted to community. My guess would be EVE, but that's a game that is one in a milion, same as it's community. And, furthermore, it's as opposite to casual gaming as it's possible. On the other hand, we have a similar to WoWs game - Elite Dangerous. And it's community is pretty similar to WoWs one. There are a lot of casual "forum dads" there, where they find a Cobra Mk III spaceship an endgame vessel. You can have full gimped Cobra Mk III in one evening. But, they voice their opinion quite loudly, and from a masterpiece game it might be, Elite Dangerous devolved into slowly dying production, cause any real needed change would meet average Joe displeasure. The problem is, both here and in ED is, that no matter what you would do, average Joe will always be displeasured. He will never be satisfied. Cause he is a bad player, and he will always be "food" for better player. But in WoWs, he will sail BB, and once in a while, he will get that double citadel hit, cause game design allows it. It is of course at expense of better player, who dodged, used cover, ambushed and whatnot. And so, it will always end with frustration for better player, and mild satisfaction for average Joe. But better player will leave the game, cause he will realise, sooner or later, that he's opinion is not important, and game changed into something he doesn't want to play. As WoWs now. The only reason that keeps me playing this game now, is RN. There is no point to playing higher tier random games - BB's dominate everything and I'm at their mercy, no matter how well I play. 

 

To sum it up. No, you're wrong. As far as content go, yeah, average Joe should be the guy who decides what should be added. Containers, new lines, clans, team battles, prem ships, flags, camos - this is all in average Joe dominium. But balance, game design - this should be kept as far away from average Joe as possible. Average Joe should be presented with results and told: here, play it. 

 

It sounds harsh, but I'm also speaking from experience, and too many good games were killed cause they were developed in accordance to "masses" wishes. And scenario is all the same. Game is released, it's nice and a lot of peps play it. Average Joe joins the game, don't want to learn, demand changes. Good players oppose changes, come with alternatives. Good players advices are disregarded, average Joe wishes are implemented. Game devolve. Repeat few times. Good players leave game. Average Joe plays for a while, and then migrates after good players. Game dies.

 

And how it is all regarding RN cruisers? Yeah, they need few tweaks, that I agree with. But first of all, no, they don't need HE. And no, they don't need that much buffs to survivability. But, no matter what I say, it's the average Joe who will decide here. 

 

[Imryn]

 

No, in a nutshell, this line is the victim of the 'passive/smoke play' meta which has developed in the game. Because people hate that, they 'gimped' the line for more casual players in order to avoid pissing off the people irritated by that meta even more (and perhaps because it would have further highlighted the issue).

 

One might have wished they had attempted to address the underlying problem rather than bar a highly anticipated line from use by most of their casual player base but, c'est la vie.

 

Fixing smoke is easy, and should have been done a long time ago.

In reality smoke is not a magic cloak of invisibility the way they have made it in the game. In reality it blocks all vision. When real ships used smoke screens it wasn't to camp inside and fire out - they couldn't see out. The tactic was to lay the smoke to cover their approach to the target, emerge from the smoke to fire their guns or torpedoes then duck back into the smoke to escape.

Simply change smoke screens in game to mirror reality - no vision in, out, or through them.

It would fix all sorts of game play issues and open up lots of tactical variations - how about dropping smoke to block sniping BB's LOS? Smoke becomes a means of isolating areas of the map from support.

They could also get rid of the fixed duration for smoke - the rate it cleared at could be dependent on the in-game weather conditions, just like in real life.

[SerPurr]

And how it is all regarding RN cruisers? Yeah, they need few tweaks, that I agree with. But first of all, no, they don't need HE. And no, they don't need that much buffs to survivability. But, no matter what I say, it's the average Joe who will decide here. 

 

 

ALL Community contributors -almost exclusively way above average players- (except for Jingles, who IS the embodiment of the 'Average Joe' you seem so hellbound on calling the ultimate decision makers) have stated the line is either weak or total crap. A running poll on this forum shows the majority of players (all of them average joes?) are giving the line the benefit of the doubt but are quite worried as to its current state. Please m8, try getting your head out of your arse.

 

 

 

[Redgecohones]

 

Fixing smoke is easy, and should have been done a long time ago.

In reality smoke is not a magic cloak of invisibility they way they have made it in the game. In reality it blocks all vision. When real ships used smoke screens it wasn't to camp inside and fire out - they couldn't see out. The tactic was to lay the smoke to cover their approach to the target, emerge from the smoke to fire their guns or torpedoes then duck back into the smoke to escape.

Simply change smoke screens in game to mirror reality - no vision in, out, or through them.

It would fix all sorts of game play issues and open up lots of tactical variations - how about dropping smoke to block sniping BB's LOS? Smoke becomes a means of isolating areas of the map from support.

They could also get rid of the fixed duration for smoke - the rate it cleared at could be dependent on the in-game weather conditions, just like in real life.

 

I suspect, sadly, that while easy to conceptualise, this may not translate to easy to code into the current game structure and/or meet certain technical thresholds. I would certainly prefer it were smoke used more along said lines.

 

The other issue is that... players being players... people would drop smoke, then sit camping behind it waiting to annihilate enemies as they came through it, the ultimate campfest.

[C4PT41N_0BV10US]

 ALL Community contributors -almost exclusively way above average players- (except for Jingles, who IS the embodiment of the 'Average Joe' you seem so hellbound on calling the ultimate decision makers) have stated the line is either weak or total crap. A running poll on this forum shows the majority of players (all of them average joes?) are giving the line the benefit of the doubt but are quite worried as to its current state. Please m8, try getting your head out of your arse.

Really now?

Well then! I guess, apart from RN game is just peachy! ALL community contributors must be thrilled about how great the game is right? And I don't fuckin care what community contributors say. I have my own brain and I use it. If I see, that I make better results in RN ships then other ships, while topping the score tables all across each cruiser I play, but then I watch Flamu, who says: line is crap and situational, what should I doooo? Who should I believeeeee? I see I do 2k salvoes on angled targets, and moan about no HE. But then I pick Kutuzov, and do 350 damage each salvo cause target is freakin armoured and shells just doesn't do damage, but I guess Notser is right. Those ships need HE badly!

 

[damo74]

At really small samples can't really use WR. For example I have 80% WR in karlsruhe. Not because it's amazing, but because I only played 5 games and was lucky (as the karlsruhe certainly didn't add anything)

 

Just bought the leander so will see how that gets on

 

rather than win rate, we need to look at damage done. Although I am winning half or just over of matches with British ships. I am not nearly doing as much damage as I normally would.

[Imryn]

 

I suspect, sadly, that while easy to conceptualise, this may not translate to easy to code into the current game structure and/or meet certain technical thresholds. I would certainly prefer it were smoke used more along said lines.

 

The other issue is that... players being players... people would drop smoke, then sit camping behind it waiting to annihilate enemies as they came through it, the ultimate campfest.

 

Aircraft, hydrophones, and radar would all allow you to see and in the case of the last two target ships behind smoke.

In the absence of any of them you would deserve everything you got when pushing through a smoke screen.

The coding wouldn't be difficult - smoke already blocks targeting from one side to the other so it shouldn't be difficult to make it block targeting from inside out; just define the edge as a block to all LOS. It should actually make the code simpler than what we currently have.

[Xevious_Red]

 

rather than win rate, we need to look at damage done. Although I am winning half or just over of matches with British ships. I am not nearly doing as much damage as I normally would.

 

Thing with going by damage is that it's paddable by using fire on BB.

 

Which is more useful, doing 15k damage to 3 DD that get easily finished off by your team (45k total, no kills), or 90k spread across 5 BB that just repair it?

 

With the myoko I could get some nice damage scores from just burning BB. The WR was low though because it wasn't "useful" damage. The pensacola I have lower average damage, but higher average kills and WR because the damage I was doing was more useful (killing cruisers and destroyers)

 

For completeness though, my average kills with the emerald are about half what all the other nations get.

[Hades_warrior]

 

I'm afraid, if you are having as much trouble  as it sounds like you are with extracting a decent performance from the Caledon, that the Danae (due in large part to the more 'open' maps and tier 5's in the matchmaking you'll more frequently encounter) will most likely be much worse for you. The ships have been labelled as 'high skill' (fig leaf though that is - but that's a different topic) - what this basically boils down to is that unless you pick your position very well, have maneuvreing to avoid accurate fire down as second nature, and the correct learned or underlying coordination to ensure you garner maximum yield from every salvo you fire, you will often find yourself compromised and wiped from the face of the planet with no possible reprieve.

 

*Edit* I speak as one of those 'potatoes', btw, I'm way to aggressive and my aim (mostly) sucks since I'm old and don't play the game enough, I do at least have some facility with map awareness and tactics to console (or perhaps more accurately frustrate) myself.

 

You will still find yourself wiped from the face of the planet when dispersion RNG rules it of course, but if you try hard enough you will extract 'ok' results from the Danae.

 

By you, its sounds like Danae is more dificult, no matter on +1 gun she have. Somehow I always felt more confident in the game when my CV's had more guns amount.

And getting killed basicly every round is the curse of any CV player.

 

I have played before German CV tier 4, the one before Konigsber. I forgot the name. And was real pain in the [edited].

 

Not played it, I ground through the Caledon in 15 games and hated it, the consensus seems to be that Danae/Emerald are even worse in which case I'm having nothing more to do with the line unless/until it's fixed and the port slot now has an Ognevoi in it.

 

One thing I forgot to mention in my earlier post, it's 5 days since the release of the line and the games featured between 2-4 RNCL, compare that with the KMBB that were so numerous they were able to break MM and force 11 BB per side games for weeks afterwards and it's clear that the line is a total disaster that almost nobody wants to play.

 

As I heard, Leander (T6 i think) is realy nice ship. So we have to hold our teeth until then if we wanna enjoy CV gameplay.

 

 

So, for a laugh, I tried to replicate the HE citadel penetration against Caldon with Smith in the training room and couldn't but I can confirm that 76.2mm AP will citadel it quite easily.

 

I'm not quite sure how I got a 152mm HE citadel on one of the T3-T5 ships because the below water line paper armour seems to be immune to HE shells and there's nothing above that which ought to be penetrated by HE, perhaps there's a bug in the armour model on one of the ships that raises the un-armoured section above the waterline, if there is then 127/130mm will have the same effect.

 

Yea, I believe game is bugged, atleast with citadeling part.

When I played Black Swan from RN, I had 3-9 citadel hits per round, which was basicly every ship in the round. And I know im not that good to get so many lucky shots.

After Swan ship with other, I had barely 1 citadel per few rounds. System seems broken.

[Matthames]

I think the British Cruiser line is a Marmite line, you either love it or hate it. I admit I have had some really frustrating battles where I would be wiped out in the first 5 minutes; however I have kept playing them and I am now having more fun with this line than I have with any other line. To do this just don't set your expectations too high. If all you are worried about is winning and keeping your stats up, go play something else.

For all the moaning about weak guns and weak armour, especially in the lower tiers; this is historically accurate. If you read up on the Battle of Jutland, you will find that the British shells bounced off the German ships and were unable to penetrate. Not only that the British lost far more ships than the Germans. 

When I see another British Cruiser on my team, I can almost predict which ones are going to die as they all make the same mistake. This is not a line that should be sailed in open water. TBH this line is really an oversized DD. I can never do much damage using my guns. Games where I have done the most damage have been from using the torpedoes. 

[Hades_warrior]

I think the British Cruiser line is a Marmite line, you either love it or hate it. I admit I have had some really frustrating battles where I would be wiped out in the first 5 minutes; however I have kept playing them and I am now having more fun with this line than I have with any other line. To do this just don't set your expectations too high. If all you are worried about is winning and keeping your stats up, go play something else.

For all the moaning about weak guns and weak armour, especially in the lower tiers; this is historically accurate. If you read up on the Battle of Jutland, you will find that the British shells bounced off the German ships and were unable to penetrate. Not only that the British lost far more ships than the Germans. 

When I see another British Cruiser on my team, I can almost predict which ones are going to die as they all make the same mistake. This is not a line that should be sailed in open water. TBH this line is really an oversized DD. I can never do much damage using my guns. Games where I have done the most damage have been from using the torpedoes. 

 

What is your strategy in playing RN CVs? 

[Ryuuteimaru]

I think the British Cruiser line is a Marmite line, you either love it or hate it. I admit I have had some really frustrating battles where I would be wiped out in the first 5 minutes; however I have kept playing them and I am now having more fun with this line than I have with any other line. To do this just don't set your expectations too high. If all you are worried about is winning and keeping your stats up, go play something else.

For all the moaning about weak guns and weak armour, especially in the lower tiers; this is historically accurate. If you read up on the Battle of Jutland, you will find that the British shells bounced off the German ships and were unable to penetrate. Not only that the British lost far more ships than the Germans. 

When I see another British Cruiser on my team, I can almost predict which ones are going to die as they all make the same mistake. This is not a line that should be sailed in open water. TBH this line is really an oversized DD. I can never do much damage using my guns. Games where I have done the most damage have been from using the torpedoes. 

 

I'd take your own advice, and I though I was bad using them LOL.

 

And Britain lost more ships due to German luck rather than gunnery, IE a battlecruiser squadron ran straight into the sights of a large portion of the German fleet due to poor visibility.

[Redgecohones]

 

What is your strategy in playing RN CVs? 

 

 

 

CA = Heavy (gun) Cruiser 

 

CL = Light (low calibre gun) Cruiser

 

CV = Carrier.

 

If marmite doesn't get back to you, I imagine the advice would be something along these lines :-

 

Avoid exposing yourself in the middle of the open ocean at the front, if you feel brave, try to go out on a flank (more feasible as concealment gets better and/or smoke) to take opportune shots/torps at broadsides of otherwise engaged enemies (*Note* danger here of becoming over extended or hunted if you get it wrong).

 

If you feel sneaky, find islands you can use to make you an inopportune target and attempt to ambush their ships as they advance (or retreat), hit and fade, prolonged exposure = dead.

 

You cannot dictate the battle, standing and fighting is heroic certainly, but most often utterly futile and not beneficial to your team's chances.

 

 

[Capra76]

And Britain lost more ships due to German luck rather than gunnery, IE a battlecruiser squadron ran straight into the sights of a large portion of the German fleet due to poor visibility.

 

Not so much luck as poor ammunition handling resulting in otherwise survivable hits being catastrophic explosions, very interesting if long lecture posted on another thread: 

 (skip to about 52 minutes onwards for the relevant part).

 

Re the squadron running into the sights of the German fleet, they did AFAIK exactly what they wanted to do and it was only due to good luck and caution by the RN that the German High Seas Fleet wasn't annihilated on that day.

[Redgecohones]

So far as i heard, since nobody had had a fleet/big ship encounter in decades the British 'caution' was more dictated by them hobbling themselves communications wise - relying on the old traditional signal flags in the many miles wide/cordite smoke filled  combat zone rather than the new fangled radio sets on board to coordinate.

[Capra76]

So far as i heard, since nobody had had a fleet/big ship encounter in decades the British 'caution' was more dictated by them hobbling themselves communications wise - relying on the old traditional signal flags in the many miles wide/cordite smoke filled  combat zone rather than the new fangled radio sets on board to coordinate.

 

The answer to that is at about 1.04 in the link above, there was no problem with the signalling system, the problem was that Beatty didn't send any signals when he should have.

 

Going off the link Beatty was a very poor commander who'd risen in rank essentially by luck, and most of the things that went wrong in the battle can be laid squarely at his door.

[Akula971]

 

I really do think they have dropped the ball with this line.

 

They say that sitting in a smoke cloud spamming HE was considered to be boring. They didn't want a line of USS Flints. So we get sitting in a smoke cloud spamming AP instead? Where is the logic in that? Who benefits? Battleship players?

 

I cannot understand the reason for this line. It just does not make any business sense at all. They put months if not years of work into designing a ship line that can only be played well by very skilled players. Where is the return on investment?  

 

If I was a senior WoWs manager, I'd be having quite a few meetings to discuss how much money has been spent on bringing this line into the game, and what the return will be. I'm convinced that is the reason why the cruisin for a brusin activity was added. Pure data gathering. But then again they could just listen to their customers? As to having a line that is "different"  good move, design US, IJN, Soviet, German lines, all based upon some similar core strengths and weakness, then go out on a limb with the RN line.

 

And for those posters that say change the way you play, adapt. I can do it so can you. I'd reply in saying that when you design a product, you design it for the biggest market, to get the biggest profit, (ROI) return on investment. If a game has a small core of very skilled players, that are influencing the game direction, it will just alienate the masses.

 

 

[Imryn]

The RN suffered from quite a few problems at the start of WW1. It viewed itself as the best and most powerful navy in the world - with some justification - but had not been challenged for a long time.

There was a tendency to "rest on their laurels" and not push themselves. It has been commented on that prior to Jutland the gunnery practice that elements of the Grand Fleet were undertaking was insufficient, and particularly live firing practice. Captains were more concerned with the appearance of their ships (firing 12" guns makes the whole exterior of the ship filthy) than with efficiency. This lead to most gunnery practice being conducted without firing the guns - everybody went through the motions but the shot wasn't fired. Everything was scrutinised and timed and each turret on the ship competed with the others to be the first to reload etc.

The problem was that the ability to actually hit anything was just assumed (wrongly as it turned out), and the turret crews learned to cut corners in order to be the "fastest turret"

At Jutland the Grand Fleet showed poor accuracy in gunnery and poor ammunition handling safety which lead to the loss of several ships - all as a direct result of complacency before the battle.

Unfortunately the battle was white washed as a resounding victory (instead of the strategic victory it actually was) and nothing was leaned.

.

 

 

 

 

Edit I am referring to the capital ships here NOT the smaller ships.

[Capra76]

 It has been commented on that prior to Jutland the gunnery practice that elements of the Grand Fleet were undertaking was insufficient, and particularly live firing practice. Captains were more concerned with the appearance of their ships (firing 12" guns makes the whole exterior of the ship filthy) than with efficiency. This lead to most gunnery practice being conducted without firing the guns - everybody went through the motions but the shot wasn't fired. Everything was scrutinised and timed and each turret on the ship competed with the others to be the first to reload etc.

 

 

Interestingly also covered in the link above.

 

The battleships were moored at Scapa Flow, they could and did conduct live firing exercises whenever they wanted and as a result their gunnery was excellent, the battlecruisers were moored in the Firth of Forth and if you set off a 13.5" gun there you'd be blowing out every window for miles around and since there was a war on you couldn't just go out to sea for a bit of practice thanks to the U-boats, so their gunnery was less good.

 

This is also possibly the reason why so many ships were lost, because they weren't getting the practice they resorted to short cuts to keep the rate of fire up that ultimately proved fatal.

[philjd]

 

For all the moaning about weak guns and weak armour, especially in the lower tiers; this is historically accurate. If you read up on the Battle of Jutland, you will find that the British shells bounced off the German ships and were unable to penetrate. 

 

That was down to shell quality issues that was identified and fixed at the same time the earliest of these RN ships hit the slipways (and was a large caliber issue, BB guns, not seen any mention of similar issues with any other caliber of guns). So this particular issue should not be replicated in game. Also please note that these 'sub quality' shells did manage to sink Lutzow, almost sink Seydlitz, render useless another BC and generally inflicted enough damage to keep the HSF in port for a long time getting repaired (much longer than the Grand Fleet) - this does not equal the 3 RN BC losses though. 

 

In my experience with both WoT and WoWs, never known WG to take into consideration 'build quality', just theoretical values.

[philjd]

The RN suffered from quite a few problems at the start of WW1. It viewed itself as the best and most powerful navy in the world - with some justification - but had not been challenged for a long time.

There was a tendency to "rest on their laurels" and not push themselves. It has been commented on that prior to Jutland the gunnery practice that elements of the Grand Fleet were undertaking was insufficient, and particularly live firing practice. Captains were more concerned with the appearance of their ships (firing 12" guns makes the whole exterior of the ship filthy) than with efficiency. This lead to most gunnery practice being conducted without firing the guns - everybody went through the motions but the shot wasn't fired. Everything was scrutinised and timed and each turret on the ship competed with the others to be the first to reload etc.

The problem was that the ability to actually hit anything was just assumed (wrongly as it turned out), and the turret crews learned to cut corners in order to be the "fastest turret"

At Jutland the Grand Fleet showed poor accuracy in gunnery and poor ammunition handling safety which lead to the loss of several ships - all as a direct result of complacency before the battle.

Unfortunately the battle was white washed as a resounding victory (instead of the strategic victory it actually was) and nothing was leaned.

 

 

Quite a few points here, ok,

 

1) Spit and polish v's firing guns - this was sorted out by Jackie Fisher when he was put in charge of the Mediterranean Fleet, which was at the turn of the century.

2) Live fire - already adequately responded to. eg The BB's of the Grand fleet had had a live fire exercise just days prior to Jutland. The BC's were frequently denied permission to put to sea due the risk of submarine ambushes.

3) BC gunnery accuracy - was poor to start with (compared to the BB's), this was compounded by visibility issues in the Run to the South, note that in naval warfare, you do not necessarily get equal visibility in both directions (eg you can have a haze over 1 part of the sea, but not another). Run to the north was better both ways, then during one of the BB contacts, the RN could see the HSF, but the HSF could only see the RN gun flashes, which is not enough to get a good firing solution from. Campbells 'Jutland, an analysis' has superb statistics on all of this. A good read also.

4) BB accuracy - Iron Dukes gunnery was the most accurate BB in the battle, nothing wrong with the rest of them either, compared to the HSF.

5) Sloppy Handling - in the BC's, yes, note also Seydlitz and other HSF ships had the same issue at Dogger bank and also Jutland, but due to different propellant and the storage, did not suffer the explosive results.

 

[Redgecohones]

Thanks phil and all, very interesting. Trying to pull back on topic, i guess the salient point is that, the idea that 'historically' the CL's were so fragile and so poorly gunned (or equally had such amazing crews that they could heal up tonnes of damage!) is bullsh*t of the finest WG grade.

 

Thats not to say that game balance isn't best served by them having the health characteristics that they do when given the current balance of those characteristics (definately open for debate up to tier 5, but hey ho), but that's as far as this goes.

 

Fair?

[philjd]

Thanks phil and all, very interesting. Trying to pull back on topic, i guess the salient point is that, the idea that 'historically' the CL's were so fragile and so poorly gunned (or equally had such amazing crews that they could heal up tonnes of damage!) is bullsh*t of the finest WG grade.

 

Thats not to say that game balance isn't best served by them having the health characteristics that they do when given the current balance of those characteristics (definately open for debate up to tier 5, but hey ho), but that's as far as this goes.

 

Fair?

 

Yes, we have wandered off course a bit

[just a tad more please.... on the flags v's radio, note that there still was no proper 'radio' as we know it, it was all morse code, so had to be dictated, encrypted, sent, received, decyphered. It could take 20 mins plus for the process to complete, whereas flags could just be run up and be 'instantaneous', but we're aware of the issues that came out of this. Recall that Hood was still using flags to communicate in Denmark Straits).

_________

Back on topic

 

Yup, WG bull.