Bismarck or Tirpitz

[RUSSIANBlAS]

 

No no, just look at the stats, tirpitz needs some buffs, better AA, hydro, secondaries and speed should be almost fine, maybe also better concealment or smoke to hide like IRL.

 

I honestly feel the Tirp is fine in her current form. There has been some power creep from the Bismarck and with patch 0.6.0 the potential for a full secondary stealth build is possible which might actually damage Tirp's prospects.

 

But overall the ship performs when needed, you're essentially asking for P2W buffs which would make the Tirp monstrous in the right hands.

[AUT_Znarf]

 

No no, just look at the stats, tirpitz needs some buffs, better AA, hydro, secondaries and speed should be almost fine, maybe also better concealment or smoke to hide like IRL.

 

Better AA, Hydro, better concealment AND a smokescreen?

 

would you like it to fly, cook bacon, wash your dishes and be invincible as well, while you're at it? 

[Migulaitor]

 

I honestly feel the Tirp is fine in her current form. There has been some power creep from the Bismarck and with patch 0.6.0 the potential for a full secondary stealth build is possible which might actually damage Tirp's prospects.

 

But overall the ship performs when needed, you're essentially asking for P2W buffs which would make the Tirp monstrous in the right hands.

 

I will try it again:

No no, just look at the stats, tirpitz needs some buffs, better AA, hydro, secondaries and speed should be almost fine, maybe also better concealment or smoke to hide like IRL. 

 

Tirpitz its amazing, 600+ games with it an it can deal with everything (except high tier carriers, but who can do it?) ambushing Yamato on the smoke make them be so salty.

But I wont complain if it gets buffed, because, you can see the stats, its obvious its worse than the other tier 8 BBs, and btw, it has a more experienced crew, so give him a 20 secs reload also.  

The only buff I would like (and dont feel like P2W) its to give him the same speed as Bismarck, just because it feels weird to be slower.

 

And for all those who say, same level captain Bismarck wins because he can stay in secondary range outside of torps... How? Potato captain will snipe from far away so no secondaries in use and no good Tirpitz commander will follow a Bismarck into the secondaries range, yes Bismarck is faster, 1 knot? It can take you forever to chase him, and if there are some islands I would bet for Tirpitz at the end its a DD.

 

 

Better AA, Hydro, better concealment AND a smokescreen?

 

would you like it to fly, cook bacon, wash your dishes and be invincible as well, while you're at it? 

 

Why not? And the ability to shoot at torps I mean you can see them and it has a lot of secondaries. 

 

 

 

The sad part of my comment before its some people believed it wasnt a joke, World Of BBabies.

And also the 44km range, so more people snipe the dmg drops and I can ask for more buffs 

[ScratxNeko]

Seriously, buffing Tirpitz is a bit of a dangerous notion. It's one of the better premiums you can buy, even if it's not OP or borderline OP for the tier like some other ships I could mention (but most of them can't buy).

 

I'd support a buff if it was a weak ship, but it really isn't. It LOOKS weak if you ignore that lots of its drivers are noobs who bought it with a scant few matches and get rekt as a result. The Bismarck looks better because it's a bit more consistent in performance and because by the time you grind to it you have some experience... so there's not so many noobs driving it. (sadly, there ARE eternal noobs)

 

Hydro also helps the Bisko a bit... but it's getting nerfed, so wait and see what happens there.

[Michey802]

As the owner of both id say they are resonably equal.

Since bismarck usually has the full secondary build (to exploit its unique thing to the max) it lacks the accuracy mod, i do notice the dispersion differences compared to tirpitz.

My tirpitz has the acc mod voor main guns, AFT and manual secondaries = good guns and the 6km deathbubble of torps and firerain.

When you park your bismarck within 10km of your target its really good, consistent dmg.

My own stats say the bismarck is alot better than tirpitz but those stats arent reliable bc i play a lot better now than 9 months ago.

 

I would say buff Tirpitz in some minor things:

- make the secondary battery range equal to the other t8 bbs from 4,5 to 5km, it feels wierd that the sistership of the secondary king has the worst range at t8, also wheras bismarck doesnt need to give a   lot of side to fire all of them, tirpitz has to give a lot of broadside to fire all secondaries. the slight range increase i think would be more fair.

-the midrange aa is too weak, tier for tier the scharnhorst has better aa (also secondary range..) slight buff here would be more apropriate since it got a lot of AA guns bc it seen a lot of planes..

-also equal speed of the bismarck i think is more fair

 

It does not need hydro imo,

 

[RUSSIANBlAS]

There is enough material on the Tirpitz to know whether it is worth buying or not, it's a ship that's been around for over a year now. 

 

Numerous reviews, forum posts and YouTube videos of top level players (Flamu) to chatty potatoes (Jingles LOL )

 

 

The folk crying out for buffs are only doing so because of the release of the Bismarck, that doesn't actually change how the Tirpitz performs. 

 

Lets put it another way, Bismarck can and should fight in the open welcoming all towards her secondaries etc. Whilst a Tirpitz can also fight in that matter, she is better employed as a stealth vessel with use of islands and concealment to get the jump on ships to torp or surprise attack. If you were to give her hydro she would become insane, and no smoke either as with a spotter plane that would be pretty broken too. Extra speed is meh, it's a few knots and largely irrelevant.

 

Try asking WG for a refund and state the reasons. I imagine it won't be successful...

[Michey802]

There is enough material on the Tirpitz to know whether it is worth buying or not, it's a ship that's been around for over a year now. 

 

Numerous reviews, forum posts and YouTube videos of top level players (Flamu) to chatty potatoes (Jingles LOL )

 

 

The folk crying out for buffs are only doing so because of the release of the Bismarck, that doesn't actually change how the Tirpitz performs. 

 

Lets put it another way, Bismarck can and should fight in the open welcoming all towards her secondaries etc. Whilst a Tirpitz can also fight in that matter, she is better employed as a stealth vessel with use of islands and concealment to get the jump on ships to torp or surprise attack. If you were to give her hydro she would become insane, and no smoke either as with a spotter plane that would be pretty broken too. Extra speed is meh, it's a few knots and largely irrelevant.

 

Try asking WG for a refund and state the reasons. I imagine it won't be successful...

 

Totally agree with you on the consumables.

Small changes in the base stats should be okay for the overal experience playing this ship, the equal sec battery range, slightly better mid range aa and speed equallity are more of a principle thing rather than to shift the winrate or K/D ratio.

 

Understanding that the fully upgraded bismarck is meand as a how she would have looked like (ish) if she survived the war long enough, she probably would have gotten the engine the tirpitz had, so equal speed is not unresonable, not saying that buffing tirpitz speed should happen, more like bismarck nerf for all i care, it wont change too much, tirpitz is fine with the speed she has, bismarck should be too.

 

I dont care the bismarck has great aa, i like the historic guns on tirpitz, just the preformance of the mid-shortrange aa is pittiful tier for tier, scharnhorst 1 tier lower has much better aa for its tier, buf it or not really dont care, just feels a little wierd at times.

 

On the secondary range thing other than i stated above, i think bismarckplayers get better dmg number because their secondary build needs them to be at the natural sweetspot of the main guns anyway. giving the equal secondary range as the other t8s should encourage more close in fighting and not camping,,,, as i still see way too often with tirpitz players .

[Gojuadorai]

has the forum gone full retard?

 

a few months ago there was every second day a topic about how the tirpitz is OP and should be nerfed.

(which was too much imho the tirpitz was strong but not OP)

 

NOW there are people calling  for the tirpitz to be buffed just because it has some drawbacks to the bismarck ??

(which some see as OP, for the record i see it as boarderline OP [:= a bit op but not enough for a harsh nerf])

 

i belive such nonsense is the prime source of the [do not want to use the term] anti BB sentiment.

 

[iduckling]

has the forum gone full retard?

 

 

 

a few months ago there was every second day a topic about how the tirpitz is OP and should be nerfed.

 

(which was too much imho the tirpitz was strong but not OP)

 

 

 

NOW there are people calling  for the tirpitz to be buffed just because it has some drawbacks to the bismarck ??

 

(which some see as OP, for the record i see it as boarderline OP [:= a bit op but not enough for a harsh nerf])

 

 

 

i belive such nonsense is the prime source of the [do not want to use the term] anti BB sentiment.

 

 

 

Spot on!

[Widar_Thule]

There is enough material on the Tirpitz to know whether it is worth buying or not, it's a ship that's been around for over a year now. 

 

Numerous reviews, forum posts and YouTube videos of top level players (Flamu) to chatty potatoes (Jingles LOL )

 

 

The folk crying out for buffs are only doing so because of the release of the Bismarck, that doesn't actually change how the Tirpitz performs. 

 

Lets put it another way, Bismarck can and should fight in the open welcoming all towards her secondaries etc. Whilst a Tirpitz can also fight in that matter, she is better employed as a stealth vessel with use of islands and concealment to get the jump on ships to torp or surprise attack. If you were to give her hydro she would become insane, and no smoke either as with a spotter plane that would be pretty broken too. Extra speed is meh, it's a few knots and largely irrelevant.

 

Try asking WG for a refund and state the reasons. I imagine it won't be successful...

 

 

Interesting analysis on the RL Tirp.

 

However your in game stats are invalid.

 

There were a huge amount of simply clueless people who bought the Tirpitz and went straight into T8 games without any experience. That's done awful things for its stats.

 

The ship herself is awesomely strong in game, look at how the top 25% perform in it for it's true ability...

 

First of all the "statistics" I quoted are valid.

 

It is not important what the top 25% can do with a ship, but what "Joe Average" can do with it. "Joe Magnificent" can win and outperform others with any ship. So how "Joe Average" does with a ship is the yard stick to measure by, not how "Joe Magnificent" does.

 

Take a good look at the statistics I quoted earlier. EVERY and I repeat EVERY Premium battleship from Tier 5 to Tier 9 significantly outperforms its line/tree equivalent and indeed is the top battleship in its own Tier. That is a fact. All of the Premiums battleships, EXCEPT for "TIRPITZ. If I were to follow your reasoning then ONLY "TIRPITZ" is used by "Joe Average" inferior players and ALL the other Premiums battleships are played by "Joe Magnificent". That of course is nonsense, Premiums battleships are played in equal numbers by both above average, average and below average players. And the statistics make that clear.

 

Let us take a look at you for example. And let us assume that you are a "Joe Magnificent", meaning an above average player. Here are your statistics on "BISMARCK" and "TIRPITZ", as you can see you SIGNIFICANTLY outperform your "TIRPITZ" in your "BISMARCK". Enough said.

 

 

I cannot speak for the logic or reasons behind what other people on the forum ask for on any topic since I am not a mind reader. I can however speak about my own motives. And they are:

 

- "Authenticity" (= conforming to an original so as to reproduce essential features).

- "Equal treatment of all WOWS Premiums in terms of 1944+ equipment state".

- "Equal treatment of all WOWS Premiums concerning the difference between the line/tree ship and the Premium equivalent".

 

I play WOWS for the historical ships, I am not interested in ships being depicted in an unauthentic manner, WOWS may be arcade but that does not mean it has to turn into PAC MAN either. Ships should be treated equally when they have the exact same weapons on board, which indeed is the case with every Premium battleship EXCEPT for “TIRPITZ”.

 

Buffing a ship so I can do better with her is something I am NOT interested in. I am interested in “authenticity” and equal treatment of Premium battleships across the board in WOWS. So putting one Premium, and a very expensive one at that, at a severe disadvantage at its Tier as opposed to other Premiums and its line/tree equivalent at its Tier is simply unacceptable.

 

All USA and British Premium battleships generally have with their 1944+ Anti Aircraft Artillery (AAA) equipment state in WOWS. But “TIRPITZ” is stuck with its weakest 1941/1942 AAA setting. Considering that no ship in history, and certainly no battleship in history, EVER was the intended target of so many concentrated air attacks (26 !) and by so many aircraft (in total 1.101 !) against it, this is not only unfair but it also detracts from one thing “TIRPITZ” was demonstrably good at: beating off and surviving air attacks. Especially “TIRPITZ” demonstrated to be immune to being sunk by carrier aircraft even when they were sent by three aircraft carriers at the same time.

 

So instead of putting the Premium “TIRPITZ” in a hybrid 1941/1942 equipment setting in WOWS, and having the Premium “USS TEXAS”, “USS ALABAMA”, “USS MISSOURI”, “WARPSITE” et al in WOWS in a 1944+ equipment setting I would like to see “TIRPITZ” ALSO brought up till 1944 standards. And more so, it should be at least equal to “BISMARCK” in WOWS (gun ranges, consumables etc.). Premium “USS MISSOURI” is superior to “USS IOWA”, “USS TEXAS” is superior to “USS NEW YORK” etc. so there is no argument for not making “TIRPITZ” superior to “BISMARCK” too in WOWS.

 

To make it clear:

 

- Premium Tier 5 battleship "USS TEXAS" has her 1945 AAA setup in WOWS.

- Line/Tree Tier 7 battleship "USS COLORADO" has her 1944+ AAA setup in WOWS.

- Line/Tree Tier 8 battleship "USS NORTH CAROLINA" has her 1944+ AAA setup in WOWS.

- Premium Tier 8 battleship "USS ALABAMA ST" has her 1944+ AAA setup in WOWS.

- Line/Tree Tier 9 battleship "USS IOWA" has her 1944+ AAA setup in WOWS.

- Line/Tree Tier 9 battleship "USS MISSOURI"i has her 1944+ AAA setup in WOWS.

- Premium Tier 8 battleship "TIRPITZ" has her 1941/1942 AAA setup in WOWS.

- Line/Tree Tier 8 battleship "BISMARCK" has an unauthentic fantasy AAA setup which is superior to the "TIRPITZ" setup in WOWS.

 

And there is no reason for this state of affairs, simply also give the "TIRPITZ" her authentic mid-1944 AAA setup of:

 

• 6x2 150mm (which used special AAA burst ammunition)
• 8x2 105mm
• 8x1 20mm
• 18x4 20mm
• 8x2 37mm

 

Now IF the current WOWS “TIRPITZ” was statistically performing superior to all other Tier 8 battleships then there MIGHT be an argument to not bring “TIRPITZ” in WOWS up to “BISMARCK” strength in terms of accuracy, gun range etc. But the fact is that “TIRPITZ” is the worst performing Tier 8 battleship in WOWS in terms of damage inflicted and kill/death ratio. That is simply unacceptable for a ship which was bought for on average 70 Euros by players/customers. And it could be easily fixed by implementing an authentic “TIRPITZ” instead of the nerfed to mediocrity one which we have now.

 

I can analyse every single Premium battleship in WOWS compared to its line/tree equivalent and everyone single one is superior to its line/tree equivalent EXCEPT for “TIRPITZ”. Take FOR EXAMPLE the "USS MISSOURI" compared to the "USS IOWA", the "USS MISSOURI" in WOWS has:

 

- Better armour in some areas.

- Better Anti-Aircraft Artillery (AAA) in terms of range and Damage Per Second.

- Longer ranged heavy artillery and medium artillery.

- Better consumable (Surveillance Radar).

 

“TIRPITZ” is a WOWS Premium 2015 battleship and apparently it has not been "updated" to 2016+ Premium status compared to the other Premium battleships in their respective Tiers. This is unfair and unacceptable. For example, if the new standard for tier 8+ (Premiums or otherwise) is that they have special consumables that should be added to “TIRPITZ” as well. The “TIRPITZ” having torpedoes was an authentic historical fact and not a "consumable" or "flavour" so that does not compensate for “TIRPITZ” not having a "special" consumable like its sister “BISMARCK” or the “USS MISSOURI”.

 

The “USS MISSOURI” in WOWS has better armour, better accuracy (without any real authentic real world justification for it) and several other extras which put “USS MISSOURI” way ahead of “USS IOWA”. The question beckons: why is “TIRPITZ” inferior to “BISMARCK” in WOWS? Whereas “USS MISSOURI” is superior to “USS IOWA” in WOWS as indeed are all other Premium battleships compared to their line/tree equivalent?

 

I can generally make comparisons like these between every Premium battleship and its line/tree equivalent in WOWS. EACH Premium battleship is superior to its line/tree equivalent EXCEPT for “TIRPITZ”. Now if there were some "authentic" reason for “BISMARCK” being superior to “TIRPITZ” it would be fine with me and I would not waste one post or word on it. There is NO “authentic” reason for this state of affairs however. “TIRPITZ” in real life was superior to “BISMARCK” and so it should be in WOWS. That “BISMARCK” outperforms other Tier 8 ships is irrelevant.

 

"TIRPITZ” is statistically not only severely outperformed by “BISMARCK” but also by generally all other Tier 8 line/tree battleships in the areas which matter the most (damage inflicted, kill/death ratio) as statistics make clear. And that makes “TIRPITZ” the ONLY Premium battleship in WOWS which is outperformed by generally all the other battleships in its Tier.

 

And what has WOWS done to “TIRPITZ” compared to “BISMARCK”:

 

1. “TIRPITZ” is less accurate (at best 257 meter dispersion) than “BISMARCK” with its heavy artillery (38 cm) (at best 255 meter dispersion).
2. “TIRPITZ” has less range on its secondary and tertiary sea target artillery.
3. “TIRPITZ” has inferior 1941/1942 Anti Aircraft Artillery, both in range and in Damage Per second.
4. “TIRPITZ” is slower than “BISMARCK”.
5. “TIRPITZ” is inferior armoured compared to “BISMARCK” (the belt armour 315 to 320).
6. “TIRPITZ” has no “Hydro Acoustic Search” consumable, meaning it has one less consumable than “BISMARCK”.

 

Now compare that to what is “authentic” (= conforming to an original so as to reproduce essential features):

 

1. “TIRPITZ” was AT LEAST as accurate as “BISMARCK” with its heavy artillery (38 cm). In fact “TIRPITZ” during its various gunnery trials built up an amazing and proven track record of accurate long range shooting unmatched by any other Kriegsmarine ship, including “BISMARCK”, or any other 1940s battleship for that matter.
2. “TIRPITZ” had the EXCACT same secondary and tertiary sea target artillery as “BISMARCK” had. In fact the tertiary sea target artillery of “TIRPITZ” was better because all eight turrets were of the newer model, whereas in “BISMARCK” half of them were of the older model which led to them firing too long since the targeting computer was set to the newer model.
3. “TIRPITZ” had the superior Anti Aircraft Artillery (AAA). The 15 cm secondary artillery had special “burst” ammunition which allowed them to fire on aircraft, something “BISMARCK” could never do because he never received that late war ammunition due to sinking. The 10.5 cm Anti Aircraft Artillery of “TIRPITZ” was better because all eight turrets were of the newer model, whereas in “BISMARCK” half of them were of the older model which led to them firing too long since the targeting computer was set to the newer model. No Kriegsmarine ship ever came close to how many aircraft were shot down by “TIRPITZ” (37+), least of all “BISMARCK” and no Kriegsmarine ship ever had a more powerful AAA armament than “TIRPITZ”.
4. Tirpitz” was faster than “BISMARCK” and had significantly more powerful turbines.
5. “TIRPITZ” did have thinner belt armour (horizontal protection) (315 mm) compared to “BISMARCK” (320 mm) BUT that was because “TIRPITZ” had superior deck armour (vertical protection) than “BISMARCK” had.
6. “TIRPITZ” had the exact same “Hydro Acoustic” equipment on board as “BISMARCK”.

 

Some more information on “TIRPITZ” heavy artillery (38 cm) gunnery accuracy comes from real world German wartime GKdos-100 files containing actual primary source gunnery training firing exercises data, which gives the “TIRPITZ” a dispersion of 112 meters at 21 km. This is a far cry from the base 276 meters (257 meters at best) which the “TIRPITZ” has been given in WOW.

 

http://www.kbismarck.com/38cm.html

 

 

 

Based on this primary source gunnery training firing exercises data “TIRPITZ” had the LEAST dispersion of any World War II battleship. Not only that but there are no Japanese, British or USA wartime gunnery training firing exercise records which demonstrate that any Japanese, British and/or USA battleship ever achieved a dispersion at 21 km of 112 meters during the 1940s. And that includes the “USS IOWA” class.

 

 “TIRPITZ” performed several live heavy artillery firing tests during her existence. For example in August 1941 it fired on the remote controlled target ship “HESSEN”, which was an old 140 meter long pre-dreadnought capital ship. Most interestingly, the “HESSEN” was hit 9 times by “TIRPITZ” with her 38 cm rounds at a range of 25 km (25000 meters, 27340 yards) during the tests for example. Those 9 hits at 25 km were the longest range consistent gun hits in the world by any battleship in the 1940s and this performance to my knowledge has never been equalled or outdone by any other battleship. “HESSEN” was a radio controlled target ship especially up-armoured and altered to use it for target practice. “HESSEN” could move up to 21 knots, and was turning during the gunnery practice to make it a more difficult target to hit for “TIRPITZ”. "HESSEN" could change speed, turn and actively smoke, all remote controlled.

 

Here an image of "HESSEN" being targeted by "TIPITZ":

 

 

But instead of authenticity which could be easily implemented, we get the largest and best German battleship in real life actually being outperformed by older German battleships (“BISMARCK” et al) in WOWS. The most accurate battleship of WW2 in WOWS is transformed into being the least accurate one in WOWS. And that is compared to both older German battleships (“BISMARCK” et al) and all the other WOWS battleships at tier 8.

 

It is more than strange that in WOW the “TIRPITZ” is actually the most inaccurate battleship at level 8-10 in WOW and even less accurate than her “brother” “BISMARCK” (“Bismarck was referred to in the male form by his commander). This is not only in WOW horizontal dispersion (276 meters), but also in WOW vertical dispersion (the value of which is kept secret by WOW) and the WOW sigma factor.

 

In the primary source German wartime GKdos-100 files the following naval gunnery expected hit percentages against battleship size targets based on the evaluation of actual gunnery training firing exercises are listed:

 

- 1.8 hits per minute and 11.1% hits at 300 hm (30 km) for “TIRPITZ” ´s eight 15"/38 cm naval guns (=.225 hits per gun per minute) when firing at a rate of only one round fired per minute.

- 1.4 hits per minute and 6.4% hits at 300 hm (30 km) for “SCHARNHORST's” nine 11"/28 cm naval guns (=.156 hits per gun per minute) when firing at a rate of only one round fired per minute.

- 0.7 hits per minute and 4.8% hits at 300 hm (30 km) for “ADMIRAL SCHEER´s” 11"/six 28 cm naval guns (=.117 hits per gun per minute) when firing at a rate of only one round fired per minute.

 

These figures should be compared with similar primary source figures for US Navy battleship gunnery training in the 1930 to 1941 period. The US Navy constructive target for their 1930-1941 figures is reported to be aircraft carrier or battleship size, so they are at least reasonably comparable.

 

Hits per gun per minute for US 14" (35.6cm) naval guns at ~33000 yards was close to .10 hits per gun per minute and they are 20% higher for US 16" (40.6 cm) naval guns, so the US Navy training results are roughly on the same confidence level as was “ADMIRAL SCHEER´s” older 28.3 cm credited with and short of what the new “SCHARNHORST” 28.3 cm and “TIRPITZ” 38 cm naval guns were credited for.

 

 

Compared to the primary source German wartime GKdos-100 gunnery training firing exercise files the primary source 1930-1941 US Navy gunnery training firing exercise data figures can be translated into this:

 

- 1.2 hits per minute at 33,000 yards (301 hm / 30 km) for “USS NEW MEXICO's” twelve 14"/35.6 cm naval guns (=.10 hits per gun minute) when firing at a rate of only one round fired per minute

- 1.0 hits per minute at 33,000 yards (301 hm / 30 km) for “USS NORTH CAROLINA's” nine 16"/40.6 cm naval guns (=.12 hits per gun minute) when firing at a rate of only one round fired per minute

 

To put this into perspective based on the German Kriegsmarine and US Navy real world training firing exercise evaluation figures the following comparison can be made:

 

 - a “USS NEW MEXICO” battleship firing twelve 14"/35.6 cm naval guns at her maximum 1.75 rounds per minute at a hit rate of .10 hits per gun per minute would have 2.10 hits per minute at a range of 30 km.

 - a “USS COLORADO” battleship firing eight 16"/40.6 cm naval guns at her maximum 1.5 rounds per minute at a hit rate of .10 hits per gun per minute would have 1.20 hits per minute at a range of 30 km.

 - a “ USS NORTH CAROLINA” battleship firing nine 16"/40.6 cm naval guns at her maximum 2 rounds per minute at a hit rate of .12 hits per gun per minute would have 2.16 hits per minute at a range of 30 km.

 - a “TIRPITZ” battleship firing eight 15"/38 cm naval guns at her maximum 3.3 rounds per minute at a hit rate of .225 hits per gun per minute would have 5.94 hits per minute at a range of 30 km.

 

There are also US Navy estimates based on US Navy statistical data. A US Naval War College study performed during World War II which was not based on actual real world training firing exercises estimated that an “USS IOWA” Class (BB-61) battleship firing with top spot against a target the size of the German battleship “BISMARCK” would be (at best) expected to achieve the following hit percentage:

 

- 2.7% "USS IOWA" hits at 30,000 yards (274 hm / 27 km) for “USS IOWA's” nine 16"/40.6 cm naval guns.

 

This US Navy War College “USS IOWA” Class battleship World War II study hit percentage of 2.7% at 27 km against a target the size of “BISMARCK” is not exactly all that impressive compared to the:

 

- 11.1% “TIRPITZ” hit percentage at 30 km;

- 6.4% “SCHARNHORST” hit percentage at 30 km;

- 4.8% “ADMIRAL SCHEER” hit percentage at 30 km;

 

as described in the German wartime GKdos-100 files which are based on the evaluation of actual and repeated WW2 gunnery training firing exercises.

 

The “USS IOWA” study figures are even less impressive compared to the actual German test results when one considers that the number of hits generally increase when the range is decreased, as is evident from both training and combat. In other words the "TIRPITZ", "SCHARNHORST" and "ADMIRAL SCHEER" hit percentages at 27 km are higher than the ones listed at 30 km above. Which is even more bad news for the "USS IOWA".

 

And I have not even mentioned that for example all USA battleships have their theoretical highest rate of fire for their heavy artillery which they never actually could attain in real life. Whereas "BISMARCK" and "TIRPITZ" with 38 cm heavy artillery demonstrably could fire an amazing 3.3 rounds per minute, these two ships however both have been given a low rate of fire of about only 2 rounds per minute which is in WOWS about equal to the best USA battleships at tier 7-10. And those USA battleships in real life could not even reach 2 rounds per minute during training, let alone in combat.

 

[RUSSIANBlAS]

I do understand where you're coming from and it's some nice analysis but you can't balance for Joe Average as the better players will have a monster on their hands.

 

I'll happily accept a Tirp buff but I don't think WG are going to budge here. Tirp probably should be an AA fortress considering the pounding she took over the years...

[Widar_Thule]

I do understand where you're coming from and it's some nice analysis but you can't balance for Joe Average as the better players will have a monster on their hands.

 

I'll happily accept a Tirp buff but I don't think WG are going to budge here. Tirp probably should be an AA fortress considering the pounding she took over the years...

 

One has to let the people of WOWS know what you think of what they do and where one draws the line.

 

It is fine if WOWS does not budge with their "TIRPITZ", but then neither will my wallet.

 

Due to "PRINZ EUGEN" suffering from the same problems as the Premium as "TIRPITZ" does, I have already decided not to buy her.

 

Other ships on my WOWS "to buy" list are:

 

- "HMS HOOD"

- "HMS VANGUARD"

- "HMS RODNEY"

- "GRAF ZEPPELIN"

 

But as long as "TIRPITZ" stays as comparatively ridiculously weak for a Premium as she is now,I will not financially run the risk of this happening again. So what they are doing over at WOWS is penny wise, but pound foolish.

 

As long as WOWS gives the "TIRPITZ this bad treatment, with all new battleships becoming stronger and "TIRPITZ" being left behind as the ONLY Premium battleship to be practically the worst battleship in her Tier, they will not see one more dime from me.

 

I already stopped playing WOWS around March, then the German battleships release brought me back in August, only to stop again in August when I saw that "TIRPITZ" in effect had become comparatively even weaker than she was before. The Admiral Graf Spee brought me back again to WOWS, but now that this is over and I have examined "USS ALABAMA" and "USS MISSOURI" and the advantages they get as Premiums my interest again vanishes. So if they want to keep indirectly nerfing "TIRPITZ" with each new (Premium) battleship released then it will cost them.

 

 

[Migulaitor]

I do understand where you're coming from and it's some nice analysis but you can't balance for Joe Average as the better players will have a monster on their hands.

 

I'll happily accept a Tirp buff but I don't think WG are going to budge here. Tirp probably should be an AA fortress considering the pounding she took over the years...

 

AA is balanced for (below) Joe Average, your argument is invalid 

[RUSSIANBlAS]

 

AA is balanced for (below) Joe Average, your argument is invalid 

 

 Yes, you can take Manual AA and have op anti air but you give up Concealment Expert. Considering how un common CV are now it's a big thing to give up. 

 

Then again the skill changes will allow both so take that as a potential buff...

[Migulaitor]

 

 Yes, you can take Manual AA and have op anti air but you give up Concealment Expert. Considering how un common CV are now it's a big thing to give up. 

 

Then again the skill changes will allow both so take that as a potential buff...

 

Or you can use the most secret tactic a fleet can use, stay togheter and no carrier can hurt you. Amazing 

[RUSSIANBlAS]

 

Or you can use the most secret tactic a fleet can use, stay togheter and no carrier can hurt you. Amazing 

 

Well there is that... Tirp's speed helps as you don't get left behind and farmed like the Standard USN BB!

 

Also that's a tactic, not a buff request for the ship 

 

[Widar_Thule]

 

Just for fun, some information on the many credible sources which provide information of the 38 cm gun rate of fire of the battleships of the "BISMARCK" class. The data comes from books written by naval experts, like this one for example:

 

 

 

Loosely translated:

 

"The rate of fire per gun was 18 seconds; it took that amount of time from loading and firing to ejecting the empty shell case. Calculated this meant a purely theoretical rate of fire of circa 3.3 rounds per gun and per minute."

 

The data according to Breyer and Koop comes from the Historical Archives of the firm of Friedrich Krupp GmbH. The firm of Krupp was responsible for the design and production of the 38 cm guns and turrets. Breyer and Koop are also used as sources by Wikipedia, so the developers at WOWS should at least have an idea that these authoritative sources exist.

 

The fourth artillery officer and highest ranked survivor of the battleship "BISMARCK", Burkard Freiherr von Müllenheim Rechberg, in his book (Dutch, first edition) also states that the "BISMARCK" could fire his 38 cm guns at a rate of fire of 3 rounds per minute. So the information is hardly novel or secret.

 

So what is authentic (= conforming to an original so as to reproduce essential features) regarding the German 38 cm naval guns?

 

- Demonstrably the German 38 cm guns were the most accurate battleship naval guns both in training and in combat.

- Demonstrably the German 38 cm guns had the highest rate of fire of any naval gun of 38 cm or higher calibre.

 

Instead the 38 cm armed "BISMARCK" and "TIRPITZ" get an unauthentic rate of fire of 2 rounds per minute in WOWS. This is equal to all Tier 7-10 USA battleships armed with 40.6 cm guns in WOWS. This puts "BISMARCK" and "TIRPITZ" in WOWS at an unauthentic disadvantage since the German battleships not only do less Alpha Armour-Piercing round damage in WOWS but they also do not have the higher rate of fire which would compensate for doing less Alpha damage. To make matters even more unauthentic the USA battleships have been given more accurate main guns (less dispersion) than the "BISMARCK" and "TIRPITZ" which they demonstrably did not have in real life based on German and USA battleship real world training results and combat data as mentioned earlier.

 

The Tier 7 "USS COLORADO", Tier 8 "NORTH CAROLINA", Tier 9 "USS IOWA, TIER 9 "USS MISSOURI, TIER 9 "USS MISSOURI" and Tier 10 "USS MONTANA" with their 9+ 40.6 cm guns all get an unauthentic and undeserved rate of fire of 2 rounds per minute which they never could achieve in real life, neither in training nor in combat. And these USA battleships have a maximum Armour Piercing (AP) Alpha damage of 12,200, 13,100 and 13,500 compared to the two Tier 8 German battleships 11,600 maximum AP Alpha damage. In other words with the same rate of fire, more guns and better accuracy the USA battleships do with each hit 5%, 13% and 16% more damage respectively than the German 38 cm armed Tier 8 battleships. What makes things worse is that the Tier 8 "BISMARCK" and "TIRPITZ" due to WOWS matchmaking are mostly entered into Tier 9 and 10 matches where this USA unauthentic gunnery advantage becomes even more important.

 

An example to put these figures into perspective. If for example you have two WOWS battleships which have the following characteristics:

- Battleship "USS NORTH CAROLINA": Hull Hit Points value 66,000, Main Guns 9, Main Gun Minimum Hit Point Damage value 1,310, Rounds per Minute 2, Chance to hit per Minute 22.5%.

- Battleship "TIRPITZ": Hull Hit Points value 69,300, Main Guns 8, Main Gun Minimum Hit Point Damage value 1,160, Rounds per Minute 2.3, Chance to hit per Minute 20%.

 

Then fourteen minutes of combat between these two battleships would yield this minimum inflicted damage result:

- Battleship "USS NORTH CAROLINA": 9 Main Guns x 1,310 Base Damage x2 Rounds x14 Minutes x22.5% Chance to hit= 74,277 Minimum Hit Point Damage inflicted.

- Battleship TIRPITZ": 8 Main Guns x 1,160 Base Damage x2.3 Rounds x14 Minutes x20% Chance to hit= 59,763 Minimum Hit Point Damage inflicted.

 

The fact that Battleship "TIRPITZ has 5% more Hull Hit Points than Battleship "USS NORTH CAROLINA" is fully negated by the ability of Battleship "USS NORTH CAROLINA" to inflict a substantial 24% more Minimum Hit Point Damage. In fact with equal commander/player skill (in aiming, angling, salvo chasing etc.) the "USS NORTH CAROLINA" will always prevail, unless the Random Number Generator by chance gives "TIRPITZ" some citadel hits on the "USS NORTH CAROLINA". Of course in WOWS ships rarely if ever engage in 1 to 1 duels for 14 minutes and matches are generally decided by the actions of all the players and not by one ship, but that does not change these facts.

 

So in WOWS not only do "BISMARCK" and "TIRPITZ" get fewer main guns (totally authentic), do less damage per hit (arguably unauthentic) but they are also given less accuracy (totally unauthentic) and a low rate of fire (totally unauthentic) compared to the Tier 7 to Tier 10 USA battleships. That is not balance, that is bias. That we are used to it by now in 2017, does not change the fact that this is not really "balance" but it instead is "bias".

 

It will be interesting to see what "treatment" the French and British line/tree battleships will get in WOWS, whether they too will be inferior to the USA Premium battleships as indeed the only two French and British battleships already are which are in WOWS now ("DUNKERQUE", "HMS WARSPITE"). Currently the USA (Premium) battleships in WOWS are un-authentically and thus undeservedly the best performers in Tier 5, Tier 6 and Tier 9. Maybe when the Premium "USS ALABAMA" is released it will also become the best performer in Tier 8, it certainly would not surprise me.

 

 

[Migulaitor]

3.3 per minutes its... 3 is 20 secs reload 4 is 15 so around 18.5? If you give tirpitz this reload, the speed, the accuracy and the AA it would be OP at tier 9.

[RUSSIANBlAS]

Widar is going to go loopy when Russian BB with their hyper historical super AP are released...

 

Warspite has the strongest guns of all the T6 BB. The power and accuracy they have is staggering. I imagine this will still remain the case when Prem Hull A Naga is released. Dunker doesn't perform too badly with 330mm guns either.

 

German BB as a whole perform really well in game, historically accurate or not.

[anonym_EFwxJOPWzlER]

Widar is going to go loopy when Russian BB with their hyper historical super AP are released...

 

Warspite has the strongest guns of all the T6 BB. The power and accuracy they have is staggering. I imagine this will still remain the case when Prem Hull A Naga is released. Dunker doesn't perform too badly with 330mm guns either.

 

German BB as a whole perform really well in game, historically accurate or not.

 

I have had Warspite in my port a long time, can't remember the last time i used it, glad you mentioned it, will have to give it another go in battle

[RUSSIANBlAS]

 

I have had Warspite in my port a long time, can't remember the last time i used it, glad you mentioned it, will have to give it another go in battle

 

 My record in her is 196k damage (!!!)

 

Just lead a little more than other BB as her shells have a lazy travel time but the accuracy...

 

I don't bother with the float plane, AFT is barely used as anything under 10km is too close. Use rudder lots and don't be too keen to use the rear turrets if it exposes you.

[Widar_Thule]

Widar is going to go loopy when Russian BB with their hyper historical super AP are released...

 

Warspite has the strongest guns of all the T6 BB. The power and accuracy they have is staggering. I imagine this will still remain the case when Prem Hull A Naga is released. Dunker doesn't perform too badly with 330mm guns either.

 

German BB as a whole perform really well in game, historically accurate or not.

 

Looking at the statistics posted earlier, the Premium "USS ARIZONA" "of course" outperforms both "HMS WARSPITE" and "DUNKERQUE" at Tier 6. I am not impressed when I face "HMS WARSPITE" or "DUNKERQUE" in WOWS, which is why I did not buy them by the way.

 

 

 

I will take a look at the new WOWS version 6 and the new commander skills to see how that plays out, but more likely than not that also means the end of playing WOWS for a while for me. The British and French battleships might bring me back, but I expect them to be just as underwhelming as the British cruisers and German destroyers are in WOWS.

 

It appears that WOWS wants to cater mostly to the Russian audience, which I can understand even if I do not agree with it as an EU customer, but after that they amazingly cater to the North American audience at the expense of the European one. If one only looks at the battleship Premiums (and ignoring the silly Arpeggio battleships), and battleships being the most played class, this becomes quite clear as well:

 

- USA Premium battleships: 5 (all the publicly released ones are the top performing Premium battleships in their Tier)

- German Premium battleships: 3 (3 of them are the only Premium battleships in their Tier, but only one of them is the worst performing battleship in her Tier ("TIRPITZ") and the ONLY Premium to do so in WOWS)

- Japanese Premium battleships: 2 (1 ship is the only battleship in her Tier, and the other one is ranked behind the USA Premium in its Tier)

- Russian Premium battleships: 1 (TOP PERFORMING BATTLESHIP IN HER TIER AHEAD OF THE USA PREMIUM, THE ONLY NON-USA PREMIUM WHERE THIS IS THE CASE)

- British Premium battleships: 1 (Inferior to the USA and French Premium in her Tier)

- French Premium battleships: 1 (Inferior to the USA Premium in her Tier)

- Italian Premium battleships: 0

 

So in all Tiers where there are competing Premium battleships the USA wins in all cases, EXCEPT the one case where the competition is a Premium Russian battleship. Clearly in the fully un-authentic world view of WOWS designers the best battleship designers in the world are:

 

1. Russia

2. USA

3. Japan

4. France

5. Great Britain

6. Germany

 

That sounds like a game I would want to spend more money on.

 

Believe it or not, but I actually look forward to the release of the vaunted and "mighty" USSR battleships, if only to grab a bag of popcorn and see the complaints on the North American forum when the USA Premium battleships will be surpassed by USSR battleships in every Tier. Amusing as that might be, that will not get me back to playing WOWS again however.

 

[Michey802]

3.3 per minutes its... 3 is 20 secs reload 4 is 15 so around 18.5? If you give tirpitz this reload, the speed, the accuracy and the AA it would be OP at tier 9.

 

I remember when they introduced the tirpitz /bismarck at gamescom (i think?) that people were confused why it was just a t8 and not atleast t9, bc of its reload. Although these numbers are under perfect circumstances,

Quote from wikipedia: During testing period at the Baltic Sea the AVKS Report states an output of the ammunition delivery system up to 3.125 shells per minute.^[5] Under battle conditions Bismarck averaged roughly one round per minute in her battle with HMS Hood and Prince of Wales. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/38_cm_SK_C/34_naval_gun

[ClappingLollies]

Depends on your playstyle. I keep finding myself in situations where i wish i took the Tirpitz out instead of the Bismarck. But then again, i play very agressive so Tirpitz is better for me. 

[ApesTogetherStronK]

 

I remember when they introduced the tirpitz /bismarck at gamescom (i think?) that people were confused why it was just a t8 and not atleast t9, bc of its reload. Although these numbers are under perfect circumstances,

Quote from wikipedia: During testing period at the Baltic Sea the AVKS Report states an output of the ammunition delivery system up to 3.125 shells per minute.^[5] Under battle conditions Bismarck averaged roughly one round per minute in her battle with HMS Hood and Prince of Wales. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/38_cm_SK_C/34_naval_gun

 

The difference in RPM is chiefly due to the fact that during training a target ship was generally stationary, if there was one at all and the guns weren't just firing over open water, in either case there is very little to zero adjustment of fire control between shots. During actual combat there was a far greater need to adjust fire control after every shell fired, which takes up extra time.