British Battleship line for 2017?

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

What a load of bull.

RN CLs past tier5 are some of the best performing ships in the game.

Even the non-premium ones without HE. The Fiji for example is one of the finest ships I have played.

 

And considering the Hood is also getting difference, less ricochet prone AP shells if I understand correctly, there's absolutely no reason to think that the overall smaller British guns will not perform just fine. 

The main reason I think you're still blocking so much on the 14" thing is you still to your core don't think it possible in any way for lower than average caliber AP can perform.

That if it's not big enough, it won't have enough penetration and overmatching to be of any use, period.

RN CLs are living proof that you're wrong. 

Same for USN CAs dealing devastating AP volleys to BBs foolish enough to give anything ressembling broadside.

 

Once you realize that caliber doesn't define a ship's worth, maybe you'll understand why it's perfectly ok to have 14" guns at tier8, and even 15" guns at tier10.

Something which oddly enough you aren't very vocal about, despite 15" AP having the same issue as regular 14" AP when used against tier 10s, a lot of which start getting +27mm deck armor and even reinforced bows.

Which is a shame because the same solution could be applied to both calibers, and would be a hell of a lot more elegant than trying to scrounge up some odd 18" or more gun for a paper tier10.

 

 

British CL's do not perform on the same level as other nations CL's, it is limited primarily to killing cruisers, they are not good at taking down Destroyers, the primary role of CL's in this game, or taking our BB's, with out HE it simply isn't capable of performing on that level. They are not flexible ships.

 

HMS Hood has 15" guns, not 14", in any case, 14" guns will never perform to a desirable degree in game like you think they will, unless heavily buffed which simply should not be the option.

 

Calibre doesn't define the ships worth no, but it's the guns performance that does, and it's that performance which is why it is not a Tier 8 ship full stop.

[Exocet6951]

 

British CL's do not perform on the same level as other nations CL's, it is limited primarily to killing cruisers, they are not good at taking down Destroyers, the primary role of CL's in this game, or taking our BB's, with out HE it simply isn't capable of performing on that level. They are not flexible ships.

 

I won't even bother with the rest, because it's been going on for dozens of pages.

 

But that sentence there?

Wrong. 

It's all wrong.

RN CLs are doing fine, and their AP is absolutely devastating against DDs. The quick fuse delay makes getting regular penetration of DDs a breeze.

 

 

The fact is that RN CLs are the best performing cruisers from tier6 to 9, with the Minotaur only losing out because of how ridiculous the Zao and Moskva both are.

If you can't even agree with that, despite there being undeniable statistical proof of that on all four servers, then there's really nothing more to say.

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

I won't even bother with the rest, because it's been going on for dozens of pages.

 

But that sentence there?

Wrong. 

It's all wrong.

RN CLs are doing fine, and their AP is absolutely devastating against DDs. The quick fuse delay makes getting regular penetration of DDs a breeze.

 

 

The fact is that RN CLs are the best performing cruisers from tier6 to 9, with the Minotaur only losing out because of how ridiculous the Zao and Moskva both are.

If you can't even agree with that, despite there being undeniable statistical proof of that on all four servers, then there's really nothing more to say.

 

Really? So over penetrating DD's = Absolutely devastating?

From Tier 6-9 you might be able to go against other cruisers, but vs DD's and BB's the inflexibility of the British CL's is quite apparent.

[Exocet6951]

 

Really? So over penetrating DD's = Absolutely devastating?

From Tier 6-9 you might be able to go against other cruisers, but vs DD's and BB's the inflexibility of the British CL's is quite apparent.

 

You know what, considering you only have 19 battles with RN CLs past tier 5, including  both premiums, and you're performing well below average with all four of them, maybe, just maybe the problem isn't with the ships?

And maybe you shouldn't go around telling others what they can and can't do, that way you're avoid saying silly things like RN CLs' AP shells overpen DDs all day, and are bad against BBs.

 

 

That completely discredits your ability to reason with the potential of special AP rules, and your undying resolve not to have it for for the KGV, or apparently in game as a whole, despite it already being used on an entire branch of ships and that to great effect.

Had it been a discussion around the KGV prior to RN CLs, then sure, there could have been some good reasons to fit that ship in tier7. But now there's simply no excuse at all.

All the mechanics are there, all are battle tested and proven effective.

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

You know what, considering you only have 19 battles with RN CLs past tier 5, including  both premiums, and you're performing well below average with all four of them, maybe, just maybe the problem isn't with the ships?

And maybe you shouldn't go around telling others what they can and can't do, that way you're avoid saying silly things like RN CLs' AP shells overpen DDs all day, and are bad against BBs.

 

 

That completely discredits your ability to reason with the potential of special AP rules, and your undying resolve not to have it for for the KGV, or apparently in game as a whole, despite it already being used on an entire branch of ships and that to great effect.

Had it been a discussion around the KGV prior to RN CLs, then sure, there could have been some good reasons to fit that ship in tier7. But now there's simply no excuse at all.

All the mechanics are there, all are battle tested and proven effective.

 

CL AP Shells ARE bad against both DD's and BB's. They aren't that effective and my apologies if I'm not the best f*cking player around here, in fact I couldn't even give a f*ck at this stage.

 

Special AP rules being added to a specific line was a MISTAKE to begin with, so you're right, I do believe it should be removed from the game, I do believe it shouldn't apply to the KGV, why? Because it's an insult to the Royal Navy! It insults everyone that died fighting for the crown as part of the Royal Navy, and it certainly doesn't represent the Royal F*cking Navy in any f*cking way!

[Exocet6951]

 

CL AP Shells ARE bad against both DD's and BB's. They aren't that effective and my apologies if I'm not the best f*cking player around here, in fact I couldn't even give a f*ck at this stage.

 

Special AP rules being added to a specific line was a MISTAKE to begin with, so you're right, I do believe it should be removed from the game, I do believe it shouldn't apply to the KGV, why? Because it's an insult to the Royal Navy! It insults everyone that died fighting for the crown as part of the Royal Navy, and it certainly doesn't represent the Royal F*cking Navy in any f*cking way!

 

The fact that you're good or bad changes nothing except for your own perception of what's good and bad.

So maybe if you have almost no experience with something and what little you have is negative, don't slam your foot down claiming the opposite?

 

If I played baseball for a few minutes, was bad at it, and someone who played it often gave me some pointers, I wouldn't turn him away telling him I know better, all while holding the bat by the wrong end.

 

 

As for special AP rules (benefiting the RN exclusively) in a video game being an insult to the Royal Navy....

WHAT?

I can't even comprehend what your lunatic mind is raving on about.

Having something better is somehow...insulting?

[EUmofton]

And considering the Hood is also getting difference, less ricochet prone AP shells if I understand correctly, there's absolutely no reason to think that the overall smaller British guns will not perform just fine. 

 

The main reason I think you're still blocking so much on the 14" thing is you still to your core don't think it possible in any way for lower than average caliber AP can perform.

 

Implementing entirely non-standard mechanics as a way of patching guns into the game isn't necessarily the best solution. 

 

Hood's 15in's I think on discussion with some others on NA will make relatively little difference - 

• Shooting any same or lower tier battleship 15in = overmatch the bows anyway - no advantage
• Shooting heavily angled BB belts in 20-30' angle range = may well fail to pen anyway
• Shooting most cruiser bows = overmatch - no advantage
• Shooting any superstructure - no advantage
• Shooting cruiser belts in a narrow range maybe some advantage
• Overall in the 90' arc of possible hits Hood does better in 20' and the same in 70'

 

Of course at some point a cute theory will meet in-game reality so we'll see then...

 

The lack of basic penetration on Hood's 15in may be more of an issue, it looks like it's behind Warspite thanks to poorer shell aerodynamics. 

 

For KGV she's going to suffer in ways aside from the fact that 14in unless 'magicked' can't overmatch bows of a lot of cruisers and any BB in her tier range:

• 2'/s historic traverse = maybe 2.5'/s in game per Warspite/Yama is dire, one of the worst features of Warspite
• Poor MV making leading and hitting difficult 
• Poor penetration reducing damage output
• Smaller, slower shells should mean less AP damage than contemporaries

 

RN CL AP is a weird beast, I've 2-salvo melted DD's and then I've done this:

 

That's in Edinburgh. Bounces are particularly prevalent against higher tier DD. This isn't normal but it's frustrating as hell. 

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

The fact that you're good or bad changes nothing except for your own perception of what's good and bad.

So maybe if you have almost no experience with something and what little you have is negative, don't slam your foot down claiming the opposite?

 

If I played baseball for a few minutes, was bad at it, and someone who played it often gave me some pointers, I wouldn't turn him away telling him I know better, all while holding the bat by the wrong end.

 

 

As for special AP rules (benefiting the RN exclusively) in a video game being an insult to the Royal Navy....

WHAT?

I can't even comprehend what your lunatic mind is raving on about.

Having something better is somehow...insulting?

 

Really, the fact that RN ships are pretty useless against DD's and BB's is something in itself. and no, the Special AP rules do not benefit the RN, it is a f*cking insult to those that died for the Royal Navy, and should in essence be removed, and I couldn't give 2 sh*ts if you call me a lunatic or not, Special AP = REMOVE! King George V = Tier 7, not tier 8, not tier 6, TIER F*CKING SEVEN!

[Sea_viper]

Do you know that "special AP" is probably the most realistic representation of the "CPBC" RN CL use in real life? And out of all things you find it insulting? If you go find the crews at River plate or North Cape or even the crew of HMAS Sydney, they probably having nothing bad to speak about the 6in gun with this shell. Sure, they mostly do superstructure damage, but that's really working as intended.

I am very happy that we got the correct shell type which works quite well in game. 

To say that RN cruiser is useless against DD and BB is really silly, perhaps you are traumatized by the low tiers?

From T6 onwards, RN CL love farming damage from superstructure and deck pens of battleships since they don't overpen so much, and any DD who knows what they they are doing will angle away from RN CL.

Perhapes you can argue it is difficult to get kills because of the lack HE for DDs and damage saturated BBs, but that's kind of the price you paid.

One more great thing about RNCL: No need to waste 4 points on IFHE ever 

 

[Trainspite]

 

 

I don't lack any flexibility in thinking nor do I underestimate the damned ship! The only way that the KGV would be suitable for Tier 8 is the use of 15" guns, with 14" guns it simply will not be competitive in comparison to the other ships it'll be facing at that tier with the exception of the Japanese Battlecruiser Amagi, and as newer lines come out, with the Battleships Littorio and Richelieu it will become even more uncompetitive at that tier simply because it is not fit for Tier 8, and that is down to it's main armament of 14" guns, and it certainly wouldn't be overpowered at Tier 7 like many claim, the armour amidships for one, is only 13.75" thick, in comparison to 14" of Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, and in terms of firepower, it is close the Gneisenau which is faster, has larger guns (3x2 15") and Torpedos (something KGV lacks). In all, it is not a tier 8 ship.

 

Conqueror will not clash with any other ship in game, and don't see the problem with it sharing the name of a heavy tank.

 

 

And it it back to this. You lack flexibility in that you just cannot accept 14" guns at any tier higher than 7. KGV can easily be competitive at tier 8, she has a lot of attributes going for her. 

 

Pros:

- Reliable/Tough armour

- Excellent AA

- Turning circle/rudder shift (Going off Warspite & Length/Beam relationships)

- Concealment

- Accuracy (going off Warspite again)

 

Average:

- HP

- Turret traverse (Going off the increase with tier - I doubt any of the High tier RN BBs will have poor turret traverse)

- Torp protection (Not sure on how effective this will be in game)

- Firing Range

 

Poor:

- Alpha Strike/Pen Power

- Secondaries.

 

Now let's switch it up. Throw in supercharges for the 14" guns, knock a few seconds of the reload so it sits between 25 and 29s. The 14" while still the best 14" in the game from those stats, would be lacking a little. But in the same way Konig has theoretically the worst guns at tier 5, the rest of the ship makes up for it. The theory and application is the same. Konig gets along pretty well. So why not KGV? It can't solely be down to the overmatch mechanics.

 

The overmatch mechanics are the annoying part here, however WG does fiddle with them, such as German BB HE shells overmatching 1/4  instead of 1/6 the armour. WG can fiddle as they wish with the mechanic they have made up in the game. But these mechanics can't stop ships going in tiers that they simply fit in (Looking at you Alaska, Scharnhorst, Konig, 14" North Carolina preliminaries). Or that RN CL AP, which while I do despise for being in the game on the CLs (no bloody fire chance pisses me off), shows that WG will mess about at will with the stats of the shells. Arming fuse times, bounce angles. All of these have to be taken into account. 

 

Gneisenau has 6 larger guns, which are better guns, except there are 6 of them, and they have broken optics. KGV is likely to have 10 14" with not so broken optics, which still do basically the same job, better than Gneisenau's guns. KGV can delete cruisers easier, land more pens on ships easier (More shells, better accuracy - Doesn't have to be the belt to damage). The German only holds the cards in belt pen or overmatch, addressed above. They are not alike at all. Gneisenau is a close range brawler. KGV will like be a good mid range tank, better at more consistent damage. I'm not saying she can't be tier 7, but it is highly preferable for KGV to be tier 8 among her contemparies, where I believe she can compete well. Afterall, the game cares not for historical effectiveness or stats at times, since balance > all. There are so many ahistorical stats in the game, that changing the turret traverse and RoF on KGV would look comparatively minor, so any argument that KGV is not KGV historically performance wise is null. 

 

But all in all, you can't accept/ don't like the idea 14" at tier 8. It ultimately comes down to that, since your original argument is that. I could take a Yamato and stick 14"guns on it and you would still say it is tier 7 material. What is so wrong about having a Lion hull with 14" on it? I know you will never back down, but your reasoning is just not sound to me. The game cares not for calibres being assorted to tiers, or complete historical accuracy. 1930s treaty BB placed down a tier because what? Slightly smaller guns? WG don't care, it is still a 1930s treaty BB, that is famous. They can decide to try and cash grab off the historical KGV, but that is likely to create a huge uproar. WG have shown a willingness to mess around with almost anything. That includes the overmatch mechanics & ahistorical gun stats in all aspects. It is after all, a game, and KGV can be balanced as they wish. Which I think will be tier 8, given I highly doubt they not want to miss out on Nelson at tier 7, given her popularity. A slow line as proposed by both of us is preferable, but that line will probably not happen for some considerable time.

 

It won't clash, but neither will Thunderer. It comes down to personal preference. Thunderer sounds more apt to me.

[EUmofton]

Pros:

 

- Reliable/Tough armour

- Excellent AA

- Turning circle/rudder shift (Going off Warspite & Length/Beam relationships)

- Concealment

- Accuracy (going off Warspite again)

Average:

- HP

- Turret traverse (Going off the increase with tier - I doubt any of the High tier RN BBs will have poor turret traverse)

- Torp protection (Not sure on how effective this will be in game)

- Firing Range

 

Poor:

 

- Alpha Strike/Pen Power

- Secondaries.

 

Supercharges are a big 'what if' but would make some difference. One of my worries would be the tell-tales or clues of Hood compared to Warspite. At the moment Hood's GM3D stats look like bad turning and joint-worst in tier Sigma. Not great, though on the plus side she got a better traverse rate. For me:

 

Near-certain Pro's:

- Decent belt armor thickness (but still only 10% better than Colorado, a bit better than Scharn/Gneis but no turtleback)

 

Likely Average - OK:

- AA (bit unknown on fit, long range battery may be disappointing)

- Speed (28-29kt will be 4th of 5 at T8, 4th of 6 at T7)

- Accuracy (in pure 'dispersion per km range' the RN look like they lag the IJN going off Warspite, they also at least considered 1.8 vs 2.0 Sigma on Hood meaning it's not an RN trait by any means, nor should it be)

- Concealment

- HP

 

Bad / Potentially Bad

- Main gun pen (even with supercharges)

- Shell flight times (light shells, low or moderate MV)

- Turret Traverse (so far the 2'/s BB's in game have only gone up to 2.5'/s - still painful)

- Citadel height if modeled consistently (should come up to the top of the main belt, which is high, no turtleback)

- Turret face armor

- Main gun overmatch

 

Unknown -

- Turns (Warspite good, Hood looking bad, LOA/Beam relationship poorly defined, ship longer than N. Carolina)

- Range (WG have been all over the place changing this recently)

 

The good doesn't outweigh the bad, even with all the reasonable best-case assumptions in my mind. I think maybe best case she could be the weakest T8 by a moderate but not catastrophic line. Every line has to have a turkey after all.

[Exocet6951]

 

Implementing entirely non-standard mechanics as a way of patching guns into the game isn't necessarily the best solution. 

 

Hood's 15in's I think on discussion with some others on NA will make relatively little difference - 

• Shooting any same or lower tier battleship 15in = overmatch the bows anyway - no advantage
• Shooting heavily angled BB belts in 20-30' angle range = may well fail to pen anyway
• Shooting most cruiser bows = overmatch - no advantage
• Shooting any superstructure - no advantage
• Shooting cruiser belts in a narrow range maybe some advantage
• Overall in the 90' arc of possible hits Hood does better in 20' and the same in 70'

 

Of course at some point a cute theory will meet in-game reality so we'll see then...

 

The lack of basic penetration on Hood's 15in may be more of an issue, it looks like it's behind Warspite thanks to poorer shell aerodynamics. 

 

For KGV she's going to suffer in ways aside from the fact that 14in unless 'magicked' can't overmatch bows of a lot of cruisers and any BB in her tier range:

• 2'/s historic traverse = maybe 2.5'/s in game per Warspite/Yama is dire, one of the worst features of Warspite
• Poor MV making leading and hitting difficult 
• Poor penetration reducing damage output
• Smaller, slower shells should mean less AP damage than contemporaries

 

RN CL AP is a weird beast, I've 2-salvo melted DD's and then I've done this:

 

 

That's in Edinburgh. Bounces are particularly prevalent against higher tier DD. This isn't normal but it's frustrating as hell. 

 

It's a solution that's already in the game, and an entire branch is already built around it.

It'd say that's a pretty good sign that it's staying.

 

As far as the rest goes, people are so damn keen to measure the worth of a gun by its ability to overmatch bows...

Newsflash, 16" guns can't overmatch tier 8-10 bows either. So what does it matter ? In a few cases, it can't even go through the bows of some cruisers either.

Moreover, the poor MV is a trait shared with USN BBs, and they're doing absolutely fine in terms of accuracy. In fact, many good players value an NC with its abysmal 700m/s MV over ships with much higher MV like the Amagi.

 

So back to special AP, of course it can bounce, and while it's frustrating to see a decently played DD taking no damage, it doesn't invalidate the entire mechanism. It just shows that lack of HE can severely hamper the ships in specific situations.

So extrapolate what USN super heavy 8" AP does to a hypothetical 14" gun, apply yet another buff to ricochet angle, and look at what happens.

And just so we're clear, people also love to say that the 14" has bad penetration, but that's a straight up distortion of the truth. It has bad penetration compared to 16" guns, but it has magnitudes more than 6-8" ones, and those can deal a world of hurt.

 

And just so we're crystal clear, this isn't just a KGV problem.

Unless you want to fish out an 18" or 20" WWI concept for tier9 and 10, you're going to have to deal with the problem no matter what.

So If you down tier the KGV to 7, then what? You accept that the replacement is still weak in terms of main gun at tier8? You accept that it's the weakest at tier 9 and 10 afterwards?

 

I'd really love if someone with the "can't be at tier8" state of mind could answer me that question. What do you do with the 15" guns on tiers 9 and 10?

Will you campaign to fit them all at tier8, finding paper ships with oversized guns for tier 9 and 10?

Will you see that special AP mechanics applied to RN CLs could be applied to 14" and 15" guns, therefore solving all the branch's problems in one swoop?

Will you accept to have the 15" armed BBs at tier9 and 10 be the worst in terms of main armament, having to deal with the exact same problems as the 14" at tier8, with things like not being able to overmatch CA bows or decks?

I'm at a lose, because those are the three possible options, and two of them are very, very poor, and would lead to more cries of British-hate accusation, and insults to the RN.

Which is doubly ironic since they're solutions indirectly but stubbornly advocated by the most frothing-at-the-mouth, RN bias!! people.

 

 

And speaking of....

As far as the very angry and delusional follow in the thread, I'll take a play from his own playbook, and say that I think it's insulting to the RN to downplay the strength of a ship, and try to have it fight interwar treaty cruisers and super dreadnoughts rather than it's contemporaries.

Now let's see how you'll bull**** twist your way out of that one little woodland critter.

[VC381]

I used to lean towards the KGV at T7 side but honestly I'm now more keen to see her placed with her design contemporaries and with soft stats to make her work. Thing is, all you need to do is to give her excellent dispersion and sigma and she becomes a monster almost irrespective of other factors. Citadels through the bow are a very specific case when most BBs (and German especially) have vast areas of moderately armored upper hull and superstructure that's a normal penetration magnet. Who needs overmatch when you're farming 15-20k damage per salvo in normal penetrations?

 

I've really come to realise that hard stats mean very little in terms of ship balance. Also, I would actually prefer playing a ship that was technically weak for its tier but accurate, responsive and overall comfortable to play than one which was squeezed into a lower tier because some stats didn't fit and had to be balanced by being made clunky and unwieldy.

[Blitzkrieguk]

Sweet baby jesus, not this bloody discussion again. 

 

I'd really love if someone with the "can't be at tier8" state of mind could answer me that question. What do you do with the 15" guns on tiers 9 and 10?

Will you campaign to fit them all at tier8, finding paper ships with oversized guns for tier 9 and 10?
Will you see that special AP mechanics applied to RN CLs could be applied to 14" and 15" guns, therefore solving all the branch's problems in one swoop?
Will you accept to have the 15" armed BBs at tier9 and 10 be the worst in terms of main armament, having to deal with the exact same problems as the 14" at tier8, with things like not being able to overmatch CA bows or decks?
I'm at a lose, because those are the three possible options, and two of them are very, very poor, and would lead to more cries of British-hate accusation, and insults to the RN.
Which is doubly ironic since they're solutions indirectly but stubbornly advocated by the most frothing-at-the-mouth, RN bias!! people.

 

Hold on there are people saying there's RN Bias in the game? 

To be honest it depends what paper ships they decide to go with. As most of them go with 16inch and some with 18inch guns (Unless you fancy going with 20inch gun memes). However due to what they are doing with the Hood, it seems highly possible the British guns may follow a similar pattern of the cruisers and given AP that can penetrate at extreme angles (obvious speculation), as well as given superchargers.

Now if they go with that solution on the RN BB line to help with the fact their guns (except Nelson) are on average at higher tier smaller than the other nations it may make the guns on the KGV a bit more valid at higher tiers. However my worry and this is in general is you'll have to rely on plunging fire, just like our cruisers and just like they did in real life. And we know plunging fire is an utter dog in this game. The thing is the plunging fire works at least in my mind on the cruisers due to the high rate of fire and ability to keep changing their guns to adjust with enemy ship movement. Where I am slightly worried that due to the cumbersome reloads the RN BB's may struggle a bit more against smaller targets even cruisers. But that's just a little thought doesn't mean that's true.

I'm also worried about this plunging fire it will suffer similar issues as the Warspite with it, either it does ALL of the damage or none of it due to plunging fire suffering badly from shells landing on turrets and AA guns and having all your damage eaten by module health which is really annoying. 

 

[SeaMonsterUK]

Do you know that "special AP" is probably the most realistic representation of the "CPBC" RN CL use in real life? And out of all things you find it insulting? If you go find the crews at River plate or North Cape or even the crew of HMAS Sydney, they probably having nothing bad to speak about the 6in gun with this shell. Sure, they mostly do superstructure damage, but that's really working as intended.

I am very happy that we got the correct shell type which works quite well in game. 

To say that RN cruiser is useless against DD and BB is really silly, perhaps you are traumatized by the low tiers?

From T6 onwards, RN CL love farming damage from superstructure and deck pens of battleships since they don't overpen so much, and any DD who knows what they they are doing will angle away from RN CL.

Perhapes you can argue it is difficult to get kills because of the lack HE for DDs and damage saturated BBs, but that's kind of the price you paid.

One more great thing about RNCL: No need to waste 4 points on IFHE ever 

 

 

Realistically representing APBC rounds? LMAO! Special AP rounds doesn't even represent APBC rounds.

 

 

 

 

And it it back to this. You lack flexibility in that you just cannot accept 14" guns at any tier higher than 7. KGV can easily be competitive at tier 8, she has a lot of attributes going for her. 

 

Pros:

- Reliable/Tough armour

- Excellent AA

- Turning circle/rudder shift (Going off Warspite & Length/Beam relationships)

- Concealment

- Accuracy (going off Warspite again)

 

Average:

- HP

- Turret traverse (Going off the increase with tier - I doubt any of the High tier RN BBs will have poor turret traverse)

- Torp protection (Not sure on how effective this will be in game)

- Firing Range

 

Poor:

- Alpha Strike/Pen Power

- Secondaries.

 

Now let's switch it up. Throw in supercharges for the 14" guns, knock a few seconds of the reload so it sits between 25 and 29s. The 14" while still the best 14" in the game from those stats, would be lacking a little. But in the same way Konig has theoretically the worst guns at tier 5, the rest of the ship makes up for it. The theory and application is the same. Konig gets along pretty well. So why not KGV? It can't solely be down to the overmatch mechanics.

 

The overmatch mechanics are the annoying part here, however WG does fiddle with them, such as German BB HE shells overmatching 1/4  instead of 1/6 the armour. WG can fiddle as they wish with the mechanic they have made up in the game. But these mechanics can't stop ships going in tiers that they simply fit in (Looking at you Alaska, Scharnhorst, Konig, 14" North Carolina preliminaries). Or that RN CL AP, which while I do despise for being in the game on the CLs (no bloody fire chance pisses me off), shows that WG will mess about at will with the stats of the shells. Arming fuse times, bounce angles. All of these have to be taken into account. 

 

Gneisenau has 6 larger guns, which are better guns, except there are 6 of them, and they have broken optics. KGV is likely to have 10 14" with not so broken optics, which still do basically the same job, better than Gneisenau's guns. KGV can delete cruisers easier, land more pens on ships easier (More shells, better accuracy - Doesn't have to be the belt to damage). The German only holds the cards in belt pen or overmatch, addressed above. They are not alike at all. Gneisenau is a close range brawler. KGV will like be a good mid range tank, better at more consistent damage. I'm not saying she can't be tier 7, but it is highly preferable for KGV to be tier 8 among her contemparies, where I believe she can compete well. Afterall, the game cares not for historical effectiveness or stats at times, since balance > all. There are so many ahistorical stats in the game, that changing the turret traverse and RoF on KGV would look comparatively minor, so any argument that KGV is not KGV historically performance wise is null. 

 

But all in all, you can't accept/ don't like the idea 14" at tier 8. It ultimately comes down to that, since your original argument is that. I could take a Yamato and stick 14"guns on it and you would still say it is tier 7 material. What is so wrong about having a Lion hull with 14" on it? I know you will never back down, but your reasoning is just not sound to me. The game cares not for calibres being assorted to tiers, or complete historical accuracy. 1930s treaty BB placed down a tier because what? Slightly smaller guns? WG don't care, it is still a 1930s treaty BB, that is famous. They can decide to try and cash grab off the historical KGV, but that is likely to create a huge uproar. WG have shown a willingness to mess around with almost anything. That includes the overmatch mechanics & ahistorical gun stats in all aspects. It is after all, a game, and KGV can be balanced as they wish. Which I think will be tier 8, given I highly doubt they not want to miss out on Nelson at tier 7, given her popularity. A slow line as proposed by both of us is preferable, but that line will probably not happen for some considerable time.

 

It won't clash, but neither will Thunderer. It comes down to personal preference. Thunderer sounds more apt to me.

 

I don't have any F*CKING INFLEXIBILITY! The 14" Mk VII is incapable of being at Tier 8! This has nothing to do with the caliber OF THE F*CKING GUN! It's about the f*cking performance! The gun does not perform on the same level as any of the guns at Tier 8, it is not capable of penetrating ships like Tirpitz or North Carolina at Long or Medium Range, it wasn't even the best bloody gun used the Royal Navy in World War 2!

 

SO IT IS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GUNS CALIBER! IT IS TO DO WITH THE GUNS PERFORMANCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Big enough for you? Or do you want me to right it on your forehead!

[SeaMonsterUK]

I used to lean towards the KGV at T7 side but honestly I'm now more keen to see her placed with her design contemporaries and with soft stats to make her work. Thing is, all you need to do is to give her excellent dispersion and sigma and she becomes a monster almost irrespective of other factors. Citadels through the bow are a very specific case when most BBs (and German especially) have vast areas of moderately armored upper hull and superstructure that's a normal penetration magnet. Who needs overmatch when you're farming 15-20k damage per salvo in normal penetrations?

 

I've really come to realise that hard stats mean very little in terms of ship balance. Also, I would actually prefer playing a ship that was technically weak for its tier but accurate, responsive and overall comfortable to play than one which was squeezed into a lower tier because some stats didn't fit and had to be balanced by being made clunky and unwieldy.

 

I used to lean towards the KGV at T7 side but honestly I'm now more keen to see her placed with her design contemporaries and with soft stats to make her work. Thing is, all you need to do is to give her excellent dispersion and sigma and she becomes a monster almost irrespective of other factors. Citadels through the bow are a very specific case when most BBs (and German especially) have vast areas of moderately armored upper hull and superstructure that's a normal penetration magnet. Who needs overmatch when you're farming 15-20k damage per salvo in normal penetrations?

 

I've really come to realise that hard stats mean very little in terms of ship balance. Also, I would actually prefer playing a ship that was technically weak for its tier but accurate, responsive and overall comfortable to play than one which was squeezed into a lower tier because some stats didn't fit and had to be balanced by being made clunky and unwieldy.

 

Oh yes soft stats, buff her guns to Martian Heat ray levels, the only way you [edited]can actually make her competitive.

[VC381]

 

 

Oh yes soft stats, buff her guns to Martian Heat ray levels, the only way you [edited]can actually make her competitive.

 

Putting words in my mouth? All I said was buff accuracy, which is a known balancing handle and has nothing to do with reality on any ship in this game. You keep talking about penetration and I agree with you the guns are mediocre but what I'm saying is that doesn't matter. Give her great concealment so she can get into range where her guns really punch, or good enough accuracy to farm superstructure damage at ranges where the belt pen is lacking. That's what I mean by soft stats, not giving the guns artificially good penetration (although the angles idea I support).

 

Guess what NCs and their mighty 16" super-heavy do against Bismarcks. Citadels? Nope, aim at the upper belt and watch the numbers roll in. KGV could do exactly the same. Guess what happens to an NC when it gets flanked at 12km. That's citadel city even to New Mexico guns so why not KGV (similar gun performance)? 

 

This is what I mean. I actually agree with your analysis of the gun itself but I don't think it's really relevant as applied to the game. It has worse penetration, fine, but it doesn't have penetration so bad that I can't deal very respectable damage in most of the situations a bigger gun could, especially if the ship is good enough to set up those situations. You're cherry picking situations where hard performance make it look sub-par when actually there's far more to it.

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

Putting words in my mouth? All I said was buff accuracy, which is a known balancing handle and has nothing to do with reality on any ship in this game. You keep talking about penetration and I agree with you the guns are mediocre but what I'm saying is that doesn't matter. Give her great concealment so she can get into range where her guns really punch, or good enough accuracy to farm superstructure damage at ranges where the belt pen is lacking. That's what I mean by soft stats, not giving the guns artificially good penetration (although the angles idea I support).

 

Guess what NCs and their mighty 16" super-heavy do against Bismarcks. Citadels? Nope, aim at the upper belt and watch the numbers roll in. KGV could do exactly the same. Guess what happens to an NC when it gets flanked at 12km. That's citadel city even to New Mexico guns so why not KGV (similar gun performance)? 

 

This is what I mean. I actually agree with your analysis of the gun itself but I don't think it's really relevant as applied to the game. It has worse penetration, fine, but it doesn't have penetration so bad that I can't deal very respectable damage in most of the situations a bigger gun could, especially if the ship is good enough to set up those situations. You're cherry picking situations where hard performance make it look sub-par when actually there's far more to it.

 

Or even better, put KGV at tier 7 where she f*cking belongs!

[Blitzkrieguk]

 

Or even better, put KGV at tier 7 where she f*cking belongs!

 

Dude, tone it down. 

 

To be honest that goes to pretty much everyone. Just accept it, this is pretty much frigging opinion of its placement. And it's a tiresome line of argumentation. Accept each others opinions are different and get on with something else because it always boils down to this petty squabble. And personally I don't give a rats arse where it's placed, because whether it gets placed at T7 or T8 they will probably try and find a way to make it work there. 

[Earl_of_Northesk]

 

Supercharges are a big 'what if' but would make some difference. One of my worries would be the tell-tales or clues of Hood compared to Warspite. At the moment Hood's GM3D stats look like bad turning and joint-worst in tier Sigma. Not great, though on the plus side she got a better traverse rate. For me:

 

Near-certain Pro's:

- Decent belt armor thickness (but still only 10% better than Colorado, a bit better than Scharn/Gneis but no turtleback)

 

Likely Average - OK:

- AA (bit unknown on fit, long range battery may be disappointing)

- Speed (28-29kt will be 4th of 5 at T8, 4th of 6 at T7)

- Accuracy (in pure 'dispersion per km range' the RN look like they lag the IJN going off Warspite, they also at least considered 1.8 vs 2.0 Sigma on Hood meaning it's not an RN trait by any means, nor should it be)

- Concealment

- HP

 

Bad / Potentially Bad

- Main gun pen (even with supercharges)

- Shell flight times (light shells, low or moderate MV)

- Turret Traverse (so far the 2'/s BB's in game have only gone up to 2.5'/s - still painful)

- Citadel height if modeled consistently (should come up to the top of the main belt, which is high, no turtleback)

- Turret face armor

- Main gun overmatch

 

Unknown -

- Turns (Warspite good, Hood looking bad, LOA/Beam relationship poorly defined, ship longer than N. Carolina)

- Range (WG have been all over the place changing this recently)

 

The good doesn't outweigh the bad, even with all the reasonable best-case assumptions in my mind. I think maybe best case she could be the weakest T8 by a moderate but not catastrophic line. Every line has to have a turkey after all.

 

Someone made a second account. Pathetic.

Also, lul at the light shells.

 

Realistically representing APBC rounds? LMAO! Special AP rounds doesn't even represent APBC rounds.

 

 

I don't have any F*CKING INFLEXIBILITY! The 14" Mk VII is incapable of being at Tier 8! This has nothing to do with the caliber OF THE F*CKING GUN! It's about the f*cking performance! The gun does not perform on the same level as any of the guns at Tier 8, it is not capable of penetrating ships like Tirpitz or North Carolina at Long or Medium Range, it wasn't even the best bloody gun used the Royal Navy in World War 2!

 

SO IT IS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GUNS CALIBER! IT IS TO DO WITH THE GUNS PERFORMANCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Big enough for you? Or do you want me to right it on your forehead!

 

Oh, you finally cracked. I mean, you lack knowledge (badly), understanding, logical thinking etc. so it was bound to happen at some point, but it is still funny to see. 

How shall we arrange the transfer of those 100 pounds by the way? And let's do it quick, the exchange rate really is deteriorating.

 

Also, british AP ineffective against DD's and BB's... 

[mr3awsome]

Someone made a second account. Pathetic.

Because his main is on NA. Not pathetic, pragmatic. 

[EUmofton]

It's a solution that's already in the game, and an entire branch is already built around it.
It'd say that's a pretty good sign that it's staying.


As far as the rest goes, people are so damn keen to measure the worth of a gun by its ability to overmatch bows...
Newsflash, 16" guns can't overmatch tier 8-10 bows either. So what does it matter ? In a few cases, it can't even go through the bows of some cruisers either.
Moreover, the poor MV is a trait shared with USN BBs, and they're doing absolutely fine in terms of accuracy. In fact, many good players value an NC with its abysmal 700m/s MV over ships with much higher MV like the Amagi.


So back to special AP, of course it can bounce, and while it's frustrating to see a decently played DD taking no damage, it doesn't invalidate the entire mechanism. It just shows that lack of HE can severely hamper the ships in specific situations.
So extrapolate what USN super heavy 8" AP does to a hypothetical 14" gun, apply yet another buff to ricochet angle, and look at what happens.

And just so we're clear, people also love to say that the 14" has bad penetration, but that's a straight up distortion of the truth. It has bad penetration compared to 16" guns, but it has magnitudes more than 6-8" ones, and those can deal a world of hurt.

 

And just so we're crystal clear, this isn't just a KGV problem.

Unless you want to fish out an 18" or 20" WWI concept for tier9 and 10, you're going to have to deal with the problem no matter what.

So If you down tier the KGV to 7, then what? You accept that the replacement is still weak in terms of main gun at tier8? You accept that it's the weakest at tier 9 and 10 afterwards?


I'd really love if someone with the "can't be at tier8" state of mind could answer me that question. What do you do with the 15" guns on tiers 9 and 10?

Will you campaign to fit them all at tier8, finding paper ships with oversized guns for tier 9 and 10?

Will you see that special AP mechanics applied to RN CLs could be applied to 14" and 15" guns, therefore solving all the branch's problems in one swoop?

Will you accept to have the 15" armed BBs at tier9 and 10 be the worst in terms of main armament, having to deal with the exact same problems as the 14" at tier8, with things like not being able to overmatch CA bows or decks?

I'm at a lose, because those are the three possible options, and two of them are very, very poor, and would lead to more cries of British-hate accusation, and insults to the RN.

Which is doubly ironic since they're solutions indirectly but stubbornly advocated by the most frothing-at-the-mouth, RN bias!! people.

 

Overmatch is one thing, bad traverse is a second, bad penetration is a third, bad MV is a fourth. Overmatch may not be the end of the world but being unable to do something that the other T8's do is a disadvantage of some significance, especially as you're likely to see T6-T8 games with regularity and the ability to overmatch is one of the big things going for the higher tiered battleships. Yes the TG's with 15/16in's can't deal with T8-T10 bows, but they all can't equally. If a New Mexico bow-ins to a Colorado it can get very harshly treated, but has nothing much to worry about vs. a KGV 2-tiers higher.

 

Accuracy is dependent on many things. Out of the box I'd say my Scharnhorst has pretty scandalous dispersion, but I get an OK hit rate with it as I like to play at <7.6km where my secondaries are at work and dispersion doesn't matter as much. North Carolina I'd call a closer up ship than say Amagi, and North Carolina also gets very heavy shells which retain velocity so that at relatively moderate ranges the shells are traveling faster than KGV's.

 

Comparing KGV+good autobounce angles to USN SHS is valid in a way, but then again the ROF on those weapons at T8 should be 5-6 RPM (NOLA/Martel) which far outstrips KGV's ~2.

 

Everything should be compared relative to its peers. Of course compared to a 6 or 8in gun it's 'good' penetration. However, in this game having 335mm of side armor penetration at 15,000 yards when Bismarck has a 330mm belt and any angling at all will result in a bounce can be a disadvantage. In comparison Bismarck's shells should be going through ~400mm at that range, enough to pen even the 381mm bits of KGV if perfectly oblique. The USN 16in SHS is coming in and punching through over 500mm at that range. Ouch.

 

I don't quite follow your point on 15in at T9-T10, isn't the Lion class design for the likely RN T9-T10 16in armed? One potential candidate for T8 might be the Vanguard which has the 15in guns with advantages there, modified turrets, I believe supercharge capability in theory if never used. Is actually advantageously fast at T8 instead of just pedestrian, has improved 5.25in's, more HP and generally may work better due to the in-game constraints.

 

Would special AP be useful? Hard to quantify. No advantage in some situations, some advantage penetrating in others.

 

Someone made a second account. Pathetic.

 

Also, lul at the light shells.

 

Wait, are you that guy who tries to bait people into replying intemperately with condescending remarks before summoning the mods? I'm a little perplexed by your remarks, at least two other people in this thread have both EU and NA accounts and make some good contributions to the discussion on the NA side. As far as I'm aware my presence here is doing you no harm whatsoever. Thanks for the warm welcome.

 

At tier 8 KGV has 721kg shells, her competitors have 1,225kg, 1,020kg, and 800kg shells. All of those numbers are greater. lul? You could be making some deeper point about cross sectional density, striking area and relative penetration but alas we only know 'lul'. Her shells/MV also produce the lowest (though only slightly) striking velocities at 15,000 yards - 526m/s vs 529m/s, 539m/s and 568m/s. MV beats at least the American SHS, but by the time it gets out to range it's lost more energy, and is just that - a light shell.

[Earl_of_Northesk]

 

Overmatch is one thing, bad traverse is a second, bad penetration is a third, bad MV is a fourth. Overmatch may not be the end of the world but being unable to do something that the other T8's do is a disadvantage of some significance, especially as you're likely to see T6-T8 games with regularity and the ability to overmatch is one of the big things going for the higher tiered battleships. Yes the TG's with 15/16in's can't deal with T8-T10 bows, but they all can't equally. If a New Mexico bow-ins to a Colorado it can get very harshly treated, but has nothing much to worry about vs. a KGV 2-tiers higher.

 

Accuracy is dependent on many things. Out of the box I'd say my Scharnhorst has pretty scandalous dispersion, but I get an OK hit rate with it as I like to play at <7.6km where my secondaries are at work and dispersion doesn't matter as much. North Carolina I'd call a closer up ship than say Amagi, and North Carolina also gets very heavy shells which retain velocity so that at relatively moderate ranges the shells are traveling faster than KGV's.

 

Comparing KGV+good autobounce angles to USN SHS is valid in a way, but then again the ROF on those weapons at T8 should be 5-6 RPM (NOLA/Martel) which far outstrips KGV's ~2.

 

Everything should be compared relative to its peers. Of course compared to a 6 or 8in gun it's 'good' penetration. However, in this game having 335mm of side armor penetration at 15,000 yards when Bismarck has a 330mm belt and any angling at all will result in a bounce can be a disadvantage. In comparison Bismarck's shells should be going through ~400mm at that range, enough to pen even the 381mm bits of KGV if perfectly oblique. The USN 16in SHS is coming in and punching through over 500mm at that range. Ouch.

 

I don't quite follow your point on 15in at T9-T10, isn't the Lion class design for the likely RN T9-T10 16in armed? One potential candidate for T8 might be the Vanguard which has the 15in guns with advantages there, modified turrets, I believe supercharge capability in theory if never used. Is actually advantageously fast at T8 instead of just pedestrian, has improved 5.25in's, more HP and generally may work better due to the in-game constraints.

 

Would special AP be useful? Hard to quantify. No advantage in some situations, some advantage penetrating in others.

 

 

Wait, are you that guy who tries to bait people into replying intemperately with condescending remarks before summoning the mods? I'm a little perplexed by your remarks, at least two other people in this thread have both EU and NA accounts and make some good contributions to the discussion on the NA side. As far as I'm aware my presence here is doing you no harm whatsoever. Thanks for the warm welcome.

 

At tier 8 KGV has 721kg shells, her competitors have 1,225kg, 1,020kg, and 800kg shells. All of those numbers are greater. lul? You could be making some deeper point about cross sectional density, striking area and relative penetration but alas we only know 'lul'. Her shells/MV also produce the lowest (though only slightly) striking velocities at 15,000 yards - 526m/s vs 529m/s, 539m/s and 568m/s. MV beats at least the American SHS, but by the time it gets out to range it's lost more energy, and is just that - a light shell.

 

To be honest, I suspected you, by the way you are writing, to be the second account of that British guy. Fair play if not.

 

And at least for me, shell weight is pretty meaningless to compare if you don't take caliber into account. As the British learned their lessons from Nelson's terrible guns, KGV's are pretty heavy for a 356mm gun.

[SeaMonsterUK]

Oh, you finally cracked. I mean, you lack knowledge (badly), understanding, logical thinking etc. so it was bound to happen at some point, but it is still funny to see. 

How shall we arrange the transfer of those 100 pounds by the way? And let's do it quick, the exchange rate really is deteriorating.

 

Also, british AP ineffective against DD's and BB's... 

I don't lack knowledge at all, I know a lot more about British ships and their capabilities than you will EVER know, I also have pretty good understanding and logical thinking, don't like that? Then you can f*ck off, but KGV will always be Tier 7 with those 14" guns, no tier higher, no tier lower, and I don't give a f*ck if that doesn't conform to your beliefs, but at least I'm not a complete knob jockey.

 

Also the AP shells are ineffective against DD's and BB's, one of the problems with the Special AP rounds.

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

To be honest, I suspected you, by the way you are writing, to be the second account of that British guy. Fair play if not.

 

And at least for me, shell weight is pretty meaningless to compare if you don't take caliber into account. As the British learned their lessons from Nelson's terrible guns, KGV's are pretty heavy for a 356mm gun.

 

But the KGV don't have the penetration to back up those heavy shells, the Tennessee class after modernisations has better penetration.