British Battleship line for 2017?

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

You weren't.

 

I was.

[Earl_of_Northesk]

 

I was.

 

Simply hasn't got enough penetration. I doubt you saw that right. Just go to the training room and shoot at a New Mex with your Fiji, it's not possible outside of maybe 300m.

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

Simply hasn't got enough penetration. I doubt you saw that right. Just go to the training room and shoot at a New Mex with your Fiji, it's not possible outside of maybe 300m.

 

I was within 200 meters, and only 1 round hit the target as it was going behind an island,  I keep track of where my shells land.

[Earl_of_Northesk]

Even that should be impossible to be honest, just looked at the armour scheme. Anyway, doesn't matter, there's nothing wrong with the shells being able to do that in this game.

[SeaMonsterUK]

Even that should be impossible to be honest, just looked at the armour scheme. Anyway, doesn't matter, there's nothing wrong with the shells being able to do that in this game.

 

Actually there is, because as you said, it should be impossible.

[Earl_of_Northesk]

 

Actually there is, because as you said, it should be impossible.

 

I don't trust a single word you say anyway and you sure as well don't have a replay, sooo....

 

I don't have the penetration curves for the Fiji right now, but your argument that the shell shouldn't be able to pen face-hardened armour is just pure BS, that's why I said there's nothing wrong with the possibility of a British shell penetrating that armour.

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

I don't trust a single word you say anyway and you sure as well don't have a replay, sooo....

 

I don't have the penetration curves for the Fiji right now, but your argument that the shell shouldn't be able to pen face-hardened armour is just pure BS, that's why I said there's nothing wrong with the possibility of a British shell penetrating that armour.

 

Well, I don't trust a word you say either.

 

Actually my argument was it shouldn't be able to penetrate the face-hardened armour of the Arizona's turret.

[Earl_of_Northesk]

 

Well, I don't trust a word you say either.

 

Actually my argument was it shouldn't be able to penetrate the face-hardened armour of the Arizona's turret.

 

Why specifically mention the face hardened part?

And as long as you don't have a replay, who cares.

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

Why specifically mention the face hardened part?

And as long as you don't have a replay, who cares.

 

 

If you don't care. why respond?

[Trainspite]

 

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.

 

The Short/Medium range AA on KGV by 1944/45 is nothing I would describe as average. Long range may be disappointing but at short range, if the pompom is not butchered in DPS (given the fire control, it shouldn't be).

 

KGV:

• 8x 2 5.25”
• 12x 8 40mm Pompoms
• 2x 4 40mm Bofors
• 6x 2 20mm Oerlikons
• 24x 1 20mm Oerlikons

DoY:

• 8x 2 5.25”
• 8x 8 40mm Pompoms
• 6x 4 40mm Pompoms
• 2x 4 40mm Bofors
• 16x 2 20mm Oerlikons
• 8x 1 20mm Oerlikons

Anson:

• 8x 2 5.25”
• 8x 8 40mm Pompoms
• 2x 4 40mm Pompoms
• 4x 4 40mm Bofors
• 53x 1 20mm Oerlikons
• 6x 2 20mm Oerlikons

Howe:

• 8x 2 5.25”
• 8x 8 40mm Pompoms
• 8x 4 40mm Pompoms
• 8x 4 40mm Bofors
• 18x 1 40mm Bofors
• 4x 2 20mm Oerlikons

 

On turret traverse & accuracy, I know things you don't. Plus I can notice trends, and it does come under the soft stat buffs. As said, I am not expecting any RN BB at tier 8 and above to get any less than 3degrees /s. Also, I would leave out Hood. She is not released and no one in this thread know what she plays like. Except whichever supertesters pop up.  

 

At tier 8, 28-29kn is perfectly good enough. You don't need anymore, and anymore is likely to get you in trouble by continual advancing. Given that faster and slower ships (Littorio, Richelieu, then Tosa, USN BBs- SoDak both versions, WeeVee, M2) can turn up later on, KGV has what is to be expected of a BB at this tier, decent speed. Being 4th of 5th doesn't matter at all.

 

Concealment is likely to be the best among the tier 8s, given the fairly low silhouette. It is still BB concealment, but it is nonetheless and advantage of KGV.

 

Citadel height is far from consistent. If anything seeing from the RN CLs & USN BBs it used fro balance. It is all over the place in those terms, so I would not count on a high citadel.

 

KGV is shorter than NoCar on the waterline. I doubt above waterline would factor into overall turning radius. 

 

I would place a lot more into the unknown. Neither good nor bad outweighs each other, since it depends on what tier WG want her to be. Tier 8 is likely given she would be among her contemparies, allowing the line to keep Nelson and avoid 3 tiers of Lions by removing a paper ship. And this is before WG try their tricks with consumables, although I hope they won't. I don't think they will allow KGV to be a 'bad' ship anyway, given the debate and expectation around her. 

 

 

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!

 

Yes, you do lack flexibility. At least on this subject. You refuse to even accept the idea of anything that alternative to your own views. 

 

The 14" Mk.VII as shown in the other thread (forgotten already?) would likely be the best 14" in the game by penetration. North of New Mexico, just south of the RN 15". 

Supercharges could further increase on that if WG chooses to use more aspects of the supercharges than just the velocity. 

 

The 14" armed BBs in game don't have many problems getting damage out of the current tier 8 BBs, like the Bis/Tirp & NoCar (*flashbacks of getting double citadel hit through the angled front of my Alabama by a New Mexico*). I fail to see your logic that KGV won't be able to do any damage while having better guns. 

 

As for calibre, if the RN 14" is the best 14", then what 14" gun will suit it for you at tier 8? 

 

I've made the text smaller for you. No need to thank me. 

 

 

Someone made a second account. Pathetic.

Also, lul at the light shells.

 

 

 

My NA account is pathetic. 

 

 

 

[SeaMonsterUK]

Yes, you do lack flexibility. At least on this subject. You refuse to even accept the idea of anything that alternative to your own views. 

 

The 14" Mk.VII as shown in the other thread (forgotten already?) would likely be the best 14" in the game by penetration. North of New Mexico, just south of the RN 15". 

Supercharges could further increase on that if WG chooses to use more aspects of the supercharges than just the velocity. 

 

The 14" armed BBs in game don't have many problems getting damage out of the current tier 8 BBs, like the Bis/Tirp & NoCar (*flashbacks of getting double citadel hit through the angled front of my Alabama by a New Mexico*). I fail to see your logic that KGV won't be able to do any damage while having better guns. 

 

As for calibre, if the RN 14" is the best 14", then what 14" gun will suit it for you at tier 8? 

 

No I don't show inflexibility, and the 14" guns of the Tennessee class Battleships after modernisation had better penetration, the 14" Mk VII will not perform as well as you think it will in game, this is nothing to about inflexibility, it's about gun performance, even in real life, it has trouble penetrating the Bismarck and Scharnhorst at long range, and will have a lot of difficulty against other ships like Litterio, North Carolina and Richelieu which are all superior ships were main armament is concerned, yes the KGV may have the heavier broadside when compared with Bismarck and Tirpitz, but it's penetration let's it down.

 

Rechecked the 14" guns in question: Fitted to Tennessee, New Mexico and originally slated for North Carolina class Battleships, 14"/50 also had better muzzle velocity, 823m/s vs 757m/s, 869m/s for the 14" Mk VII when supercharged but this was only for coastal guns.

[Earl_of_Northesk]

No I don't show inflexibility, and the 14" guns of the Tennessee class Battleships after modernisation had better penetration, the 14" Mk VII will not perform as well as you think it will in game, this is nothing to about inflexibility, it's about gun performance, even in real life, it has trouble penetrating the Bismarck and Scharnhorst at long range, and will have a lot of difficulty against other ships like Litterio, North Carolina and Richelieu which are all superior ships were main armament is concerned, yes the KGV may have the heavier broadside when compared with Bismarck and Tirpitz, but it's penetration let's it down.

 

Rechecked the 14" guns in question: Fitted to Tennessee, New Mexico and originally slated for North Carolina class Battleships, 14"/50 also had better muzzle velocity, 823m/s vs 757m/s, 869m/s for the 14" Mk VII when supercharged but this was only for coastal guns.

 

You really are like a broken record. Guns are fine. And they are only one aspect of the ship. Not its strongest part, but it doesn't need to be.

The problem is your game knowledge is extremely lacking, which is the reason you think the guns do matter that much. They don't.

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

You really are like a broken record. Guns are fine. And they are only one aspect of the ship. Not its strongest part, but it doesn't need to be.

The problem is your game knowledge is extremely lacking, which is the reason you think the guns do matter that much. They don't.

 

The guns do matter an awful lot actually, and it's nothing to do with my ingame knowledge.

[Earl_of_Northesk]

It has, because you have no idea how to work around lacking penetration. You are not good enough for that and thats why you think the 14" guns won't suffice. All you look at is: can it citadel the enemy BB's belt? Which is pretty pointless.

[SeaMonsterUK]

It has, because you have no idea how to work around lacking penetration. You are not good enough for that and thats why you think the 14" guns won't suffice. All you look at is: can it citadel the enemy BB's bekt? Which is pretty pointless.

 

I know perfectly well how to work around a lack of penetration, so yes I am good enough for that, but we'll wait and see and when I am ultimately right, remind me to tell you "I told you so" because I really cannot wait for that moment. Also, I don't look at whether it can or can't citadel a BB, citadele a BB is the overall objective, but not a necessary feature in a BB's main armament.

[Earl_of_Northesk]

 

I know perfectly well how to work around a lack of penetration, so yes I am good enough for that, but we'll wait and see and when I am ultimately right, remind me to tell you "I told you so" because I really cannot wait for that moment. Also, I don't look at whether it can or can't citadel a BB, citadele a BB is the overall objective, but not a necessary feature in a BB's main armament.

 

Looking at what you do with your RNCL's, you really, really don't know how to do that....

And you're just getting more pathetic by the minute. That's the mindset of a 14 year old.

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

Looking at what you do with your RNCL's, you really, really don't know how to do that....

And you're just getting more pathetic by the minute. That's the mindset of a 14 year old.

 

I'm better at playing Battleships than I am at playing Cruisers with exception to North Cal, still need to get used to her guns, and I am not using nor do I have the mindset of a 14 year old.

[EUmofton]

Forum ate your post :/

 

Well, knowing about traverse and accuracy it does give you an advantage. As it is we have Warspite with the RN standard dispersion/km rate indicated as inferior to the Japanese but not to the others. Sigma seems entirely soft. The T7's do well, the T8's not so well, any suggestion that Hood would get 1.8 is worrying. Konig's recent kick down to 1.8 from 2.0 shows it's just whatever they want. There is a problem with the 14in's and T8's seeing 14in is very different from T10's seeing them.

 

Traverse - Warspite and Yamato got a bit better than they should, Hood we don't know yet but it looked promising, 3'/s is still pretty lame and if the discussion's on what to expect, I expect bad.

 

Sure 28-29kts is perfectly acceptable, it just isn't in the 'offsetting the guns plus' column, that's the issue with the ship. The guns are a variably big negative and nothing on the positives side is really that great as a positive -

 

Speed - fine at either T7 or T8, not anything that gives her an edge over the others, solid but acceptable

Armor - well, damage to the belt is only one of many damage sources and there are a ton of scenarios where it doesn't do much for her (i.e. shell penetrates anyway, shell bounces when it would bounce anyway)

AA - good, but the Pom-Pom is range limited and the long range issues mean you're not a shield and don't get planes on the way in. AA's kind of pointless in 75% of a games that lack a carrier, then those games where the carrier doesn't go for you, then those games with a lower tier carrier you'd stomp anyway, or if a Midway decides to delete you.

Concealment - a strength, but North Carolina's already out there and there's competition for skills and modules to really ram it home

Citadel - indeed inconsistent, but the basic interpretation which is no turtleback, high armor belt with little internal division and top of belt frequently being the boundary, outlook poor?

Turns - Hmm, I need to look at LWL but it's not a major incredible point. If Hood had had Warspite-esque turning I'd feel more positive.

 

There are certainly unknowns but is there a single good ship in the game which has demonstrably bad guns? I can think of more great ships with great guns than ships which manage to be good with bad main armament.

[Blitzkrieguk]

it has trouble penetrating the Bismarck and Scharnhorst at long range

 

  Like all most RN ships they relied on plunging fire and punching through the deck. I don't remember the DoY having a problem with the Scharnhorst as It disabled its engines if I remember correctly. In the engagment the DoY stopped firing I think by 8 to 10 miles due to the plunging fire would no longer be effective as they were too close.

 

And everything struggled with the Bismarck even the Rodney. It's why the Rodney had to torpedo it.

 

 

 

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

 

PoW was able to get 2 critical hits on Bismarck as well (bow and waterline), generally it's about hitting the right points, DoY's hit on the engines was lucky but in general terms the range had to be closed for the 14" guns to be effective, and I can see you are trying to be sarcastic with the Bismarck engagement but I'll play along, the 14" guns were only truly effective once the range had been closed and the last salvos came from DD Torpedoes, Rodney didn't have any 

[Blitzkrieguk]

 

PoW was able to get 2 critical hits on Bismarck as well (bow and waterline), generally it's about hitting the right points, DoY's hit on the engines was lucky but in general terms the range had to be closed for the 14" guns to be effective, and I can see you are trying to be sarcastic with the Bismarck engagement but I'll play along, the 14" guns were only truly effective once the range had been closed and the last salvos came from DD Torpedoes, Rodney didn't have any 

 

The last torpedos were from destroyers. Still the Rodney closed to 3200 yds and lobbed some torpedos at it 

 

Still our guns were reliant on plunging fire. It's why we dropped the velocity on our guns so we could chuck shells onto the deck. While in real life this works. In game... not so much. 

 

 

 

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

The last torpedos were from destroyers. Still the Rodney closed to 3200 yds and lobbed some torpedos at it 

 

Still our guns were reliant on plunging fire. It's why we dropped the velocity on our guns so we could chuck shells onto the deck. While in real life this works. In game... not so much. 

 

 

 

 

True, and shells back then were inaccurate anyway, but as far as I can tell, though I probably am forgetting that Rodney did have submerged torpedo tubes

 

In any case we'll see, but I don't think it will work in game as well as people hope/think it will.

[Earl_of_Northesk]

 

Well, knowing about traverse and accuracy it does give you an advantage. As it is we have Warspite with the RN standard dispersion/km rate indicated as inferior to the Japanese but not to the others. Sigma seems entirely soft. The T7's do well, the T8's not so well, any suggestion that Hood would get 1.8 is worrying. Konig's recent kick down to 1.8 from 2.0 shows it's just whatever they want. There is a problem with the 14in's and T8's seeing 14in is very different from T10's seeing them.

 

Traverse - Warspite and Yamato got a bit better than they should, Hood we don't know yet but it looked promising, 3'/s is still pretty lame and if the discussion's on what to expect, I expect bad.

 

Sure 28-29kts is perfectly acceptable, it just isn't in the 'offsetting the guns plus' column, that's the issue with the ship. The guns are a variably big negative and nothing on the positives side is really that great as a positive -

 

Speed - fine at either T7 or T8, not anything that gives her an edge over the others, solid but acceptable

Armor - well, damage to the belt is only one of many damage sources and there are a ton of scenarios where it doesn't do much for her (i.e. shell penetrates anyway, shell bounces when it would bounce anyway)

AA - good, but the Pom-Pom is range limited and the long range issues mean you're not a shield and don't get planes on the way in. AA's kind of pointless in 75% of a games that lack a carrier, then those games where the carrier doesn't go for you, then those games with a lower tier carrier you'd stomp anyway, or if a Midway decides to delete you.

Concealment - a strength, but North Carolina's already out there and there's competition for skills and modules to really ram it home

Citadel - indeed inconsistent, but the basic interpretation which is no turtleback, high armor belt with little internal division and top of belt frequently being the boundary, outlook poor?

Turns - Hmm, I need to look at LWL but it's not a major incredible point. If Hood had had Warspite-esque turning I'd feel more positive.

 

There are certainly unknowns but is there a single good ship in the game which has demonstrably bad guns? I can think of more great ships with great guns than ships which manage to be good with bad main armament.

 

As for the turns, this seems (while it is a balancing factor still) to be based largely upon ship lenght. So Warspite getting a good one is no surprise and KGV is rather short as well, making it very likely she will get a good turning cycle.

[FionnMacC]

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 

 

'Special' AP doesn't exist. It's Semi-AP, and it seems to cover Common Pointed (Tiers 2 & 3, nearest US designation Special Common), Common Pointed Capped (Tiers 1, 4 & 5) and Common Pointed Ballistic Cap (SAPBC, Tiers 6 to 10). And it's not represented properly, the version in game doesn't feature the larger burster charge of these rounds (usually half to a third the size of a HE round explosive content, double or triple the burster of AP), so the explosive damage isn't present. It should also carry some of the fire chance of HE relative to the burster size. 

 

 

[SeaMonsterUK]

'Special' AP doesn't exist. It's Semi-AP, and it seems to cover Common Pointed (Tiers 2 & 3, nearest US designation Special Common), Common Pointed Capped (Tiers 1, 4 & 5) and Common Pointed Ballistic Cap (SAPBC, Tiers 6 to 10). And it's not represented properly, the version in game doesn't feature the larger burster charge of these rounds (usually half to a third the size of a HE round explosive content, double or triple the burster of AP), so the explosive damage isn't present. It should also carry some of the fire chance of HE relative to the burster size. 

 

 

 

And it's that fire chance which makes Light and Heavy cruisers useful against larger ships like Battleships, espiecally carriers as fires stop them launching fighters or bombers assuming they don't have the skill required to launch aircraft from a burning flight deck.

 

Post-war designation for CPBC was SAPBC, the Ballistic Cap was used to streamline the shell