British Battleship line for 2017?

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

As of now, there is no gun upgrade. There's just what's essentially a 4-2-4 setup of 15" guns that are labeled as 14" guns 

 

The gun upgrade is attached to Hull B technically, the stock Hull A is still the 14" guns.

[Comrad_StaIin]

 

The gun upgrade is attached to Hull B technically, the stock Hull A is still the 14" guns.

 

the upgraded guns are 14" as well however

they are seen as 15" guns by the game to allow the KGV Overmatching Cruisers and low tier BBs

in the stats pannel they will be shown as 14" guns

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

the upgraded guns are 14" as well however

they are seen as 15" guns by the game to allow the KGV Overmatching Cruisers and low tier BBs

in the stats pannel they will be shown as 14" guns

 

As far as I'm aware from the leaks, the 14" guns are from Hull A and the 15" guns are from Hull B but using 14" gun models because WG are allergic to doing a good job with the British line.

[Comrad_StaIin]

 

As far as I'm aware from the leaks, the 14" guns are from Hull A and the 15" guns are from Hull B but using 14" gun models because WG are allergic to doing a good job with the British line.

 

not just the model 

the in game numbers will show 14" guns aswell

it just allows the KGV to be competetive at tier 8 even in its historical configuration

 

see the shells are 14"

but the game sees them as 15"

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

not just the model 

the in game numbers will show 14" guns aswell

it just allows the KGV to be competetive at tier 8 even in its historical configuration

 

see the shells are 14"

but the game sees them as 15"

 

I any case, WG should at least model the 3x3 15" guns and actually keep it separate from the hull upgrade, it just makes them look lazy.

[Killerbin34]

 

not just the model 

the in game numbers will show 14" guns aswell

it just allows the KGV to be competetive at tier 8 even in its historical configuration

 

see the shells are 14"

but the game sees them as 15"

Thats an interesting solution to the issue but they will be able to act as 15'' with regard to overmatching ?

[Comrad_StaIin]

Thats an interesting solution to the issue but they will be able to act as 15'' with regard to overmatching ?

 

thats exactly why they are doing it to give the 14" guns overmatching abilities of 15" guns

[Killerbin34]

 

thats exactly why they are doing it to give the 14" guns overmatching abilities of 15" guns

Thats good I suppose a bit wierd which infuriate the purists who want the 3x3 but keeps the the iconic look of KGV without making her overly weak in game.

[LDPDC]

 

thats exactly why they are doing it to give the 14" guns overmatching abilities of 15" guns

 

Great solution imho!

[phoenix_jz]

To be quite blunt;

 

KGV is armed with a 10x battery of the 15"/45 Mk.II's that she was originally intended to have (albeit in a 3x3 arrangement). They are the same 879kg shells, fired at the same 836mps velocity. That's why they hit 11900 damage on the AP. The penetration on the HE, 95mm, is what you get when you mix German BB HE penetration with a 15" gun (RN BBs have the German 1/4 HE penetration mechanic. Conqueror has 114mm of pen with her HE! ).

 

WG has labeled them as 14" guns. That's it. They are the 15"/45 Mk.II's in reality.

 

To the average person playing the game, they're just KGV's 14" guns she carried historically.

In terms of the cold hard truth... well, sorry ​Richelieu, but it looks like the British get the first quad 15" turrets in the game!  

[El2aZeR]

RN BBs have the German 1/4 HE penetration mechanic

 

So... Someone care to tell me what RN BBs do NOT have?

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

So... Someone care to tell me what RN BBs do NOT have?

 

AP shells knowing Wargaming.

[phoenix_jz]

 

So... Someone care to tell me what RN BBs do NOT have?

 

Good long range AA...?

 

In terms of just DP gun AA... Cleveland stomps all over them... so we'll have to see if the metric sh*t-ton of 40mm guns on them is enough to compensate.

 

Also, while KGV and Lion have great citadel placement... the citadels of Nelson and Conqueror... well... Iowa. Old Iowa.

[El2aZeR]

In terms of just DP gun AA... Cleveland stomps all over them... so we'll have to see if the metric sh*t-ton of 40mm guns on them is enough to compensate.

 

According to the leaked stats Conqueror surpasses my DM in terms of DPS by a staggering 84 points (600 vs 516). At mid range. Base (aka not even with upgrades). Full AA spec she may very well reach over 1k DPS. Rest assured that these ships will not be weak in the AA department by any means.

Quite frankly that ship will make everything else obsolete if she reaches release in this state.

 

Citadel placement along with concealment are the two true weaknesses I've seen so far. Those may not even be that crippling considering she will probably be played as a long range sniper (we obviously needed more camping), especially if she benefits from plunging fire unlike every other ship currently sailing around.

If the rest of the tree is similar I may very well quit the game.

[phoenix_jz]

 

According to the leaked stats Conqueror surpasses my DM in terms of DPS by a staggering 84 points (600 vs 516). At mid range. Base (aka not even with upgrades). Full AA spec she may very well reach over 1k DPS. Rest assured that these ships will not be weak in the AA department by any means.

Quite frankly that ship will make everything else obsolete if she reaches release in this state.

 

Citadel placement along with concealment are the two true weaknesses I've seen so far. Those may not even be that crippling considering she will probably be played as a long range sniper (we obviously needed more camping), especially if she benefits from plunging fire unlike every other ship currently sailing around.

If the rest of the tree is similar I may very well quit the game.

 

That depends... pretty much all the 'umpf' in her AA is in her 40mm AA, so your DM probably has more effective AA, even if you ignore DF.

 

Conqueror's AA breaks down to 68 dps @ 5.2 km, and 527.2 dps @ 3.5 km.

Des Moines? You're looking at 425.4 dps @ 5 km, and 43.2 dps @ 2.0 km.

 

The sniper aspect of her is interesting. Her range can be increased with modules & spotters out to a hilarious 40.6 km... at which range plunging fire should be absolutely possible, seeing as the big barrier is being able to hit a deck at an angle greater than 30º...

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

That depends... pretty much all the 'umpf' in her AA is in her 40mm AA, so your DM probably has more effective AA, even if you ignore DF.

 

Conqueror's AA breaks down to 68 dps @ 5.2 km, and 527.2 dps @ 3.5 km.

Des Moines? You're looking at 425.4 dps @ 5 km, and 43.2 dps @ 2.0 km.

 

The sniper aspect of her is interesting. Her range can be increased with modules & spotters out to a hilarious 40.6 km... at which range plunging fire should be absolutely possible, seeing as the big barrier is being able to hit a deck at an angle greater than 30º...

 

Montana still has better AA with just over 600 DPS iirc.

[El2aZeR]

That depends... pretty much all the 'umpf' in her AA is in her 40mm AA, so your DM probably has more effective AA, even if you ignore DF.

 

While true, that's still far more than enough to discourage air strikes, especially if you invest in the usual range upgrades every BB captain (including me) seems to take. 600 DPS at ~5km is nothing to laugh at. Strikes at anything near her vicinity will be incredibly costly. Considering every other advantage she currently holds she may very well be almost invincible to any kind of threat in the hands of a fairly competent player.

 

Montana still has better AA with just over 600 DPS iirc.

 

Mine has 669. but a good chunk is in the 20mm guns (194). Conqueror will have more effective AA than her.

It's funny how real life designs seem to get shafted comparatively speaking. I'm sure Monty would've received the 3"/50 AA guns had she actually been built, along with a lot more guns in general considering all her empty deck space.

(No, I'm not calling for an AA buff for Monty. I'm not stupid.)

[SeaMonsterUK]

Mine has 669. but a good chunk is in the 20mm guns (194). Conqueror will have more effective AA than her.

It's funny how real life designs seem to get shafted comparatively speaking. I'm sure Monty would've received the 3"/50 AA guns had she actually been built, along with a lot more guns in general considering all her empty deck space.

(No, I'm not calling for an AA buff for Monty. I'm not stupid.)

Assuming the Lion-class 1945 B3 design got built it would have been better than the Montana despite the loss of a 16" 3 gun turret, which I still think should have been the tier 10.

[El2aZeR]

Assuming the Lion-class 1945 B3 design got built it would have been better than the Montana despite the loss of a 16" 3 gun turret, which I still think should have been the tier 10.

 

I have to admit that I'm not too well versed with RN battleships, thus I have little idea what the Lion 1945 B3 would've been capable of or how well she would stack up to Monty.

Care to elaborate why she would've been better than a Montana despite losing out in firepower?

[Killerbin34]

 

I have to admit that I'm not too well versed with RN battleships, thus I have little idea what the Lion 1945 B3 would've been capable of or how well she would stack up to Monty.

Care to elaborate why she would've been better than a Montana despite losing out in firepower?

 

Her turrets in game terms would fire as fast as a Scharnhorst with equal armour to a Monty

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

I have to admit that I'm not too well versed with RN battleships, thus I have little idea what the Lion 1945 B3 would've been capable of or how well she would stack up to Monty.

Care to elaborate why she would've been better than a Montana despite losing out in firepower?

 

Her armament is as follows:

• 3x3 16"/45 Mk IV guns in Mk III turrets, rate of fire was expected around 3 rounds per minute, so 27 combined compared to Montys 24 combined Rate of fire
• 12x2 4.5" RP10 Mk VII guns, would essentially be the deadliest DP armament on a ship
• 10x6 and 2x2 40mm Bofors
• Numerous, though undetermined amount of 20mm Oerlikons

[El2aZeR]

Ah, thanks for the answers!

 

How does the armor pen of the 16"/45 Mk IV stack up to the 16"/50 Mark 7? (Highly unlikely to make any difference ingame unless the British guns are somehow significantly worse, which is I believe extremely doubtful)

[SeaMonsterUK]

Ah, thanks for the answers!

 

How does the armor pen of the 16"/45 Mk IV stack up to the 16"/50 Mark 7? (Highly unlikely to make any difference ingame unless the British guns are somehow significantly worse, which is I believe extremely doubtful)

 

iirc the 16"/45 Mk II had better pen than the Mk 6 or 7 16" guns of US battleships, so it likely the Mk IV with a heavier shell would have superior penetration power, but at the end of the day US 16" guns had a heavier shell so they'd still take get the advantage of better damage output.

[El2aZeR]

Well, I must admit that a T10 BB like this definitely has her appeal.

 

She however wouldn't pander to the dumbest playerbase currently ingame like Conqueror obviously does, which I imagine is the primary reason why Conqueror was conceived in the first place.

[SeaMonsterUK]

Conqueror should just be deleted from the game files full stop and actually give Britain a proper tier 10 rather than abomination we are getting.