British Battleship line - Everything I believe is FUBAR + Suggestions

[SeaMonsterUK]

Hello all, Chipmunk of Vengeance here.

 

As everyone is aware by now, the British Battleships, at least the preliminary work on it, has been revealed, so we have a fairly good idea on what to expect, however there are a few things that, as a player, I find dissatisfying about the British Battleship line and the way Wargaming.net is going about it, and well, OK I have mentioned line in the title, but this is really about 2 ships, King George V and Conqueror. What do I believe is wrong with them? Well, what I believe is wrong with them is the complete mess Wargaming.net has made of them.

 

HMS King George V

 

As a lot of people know, I've said multiple times that we wouldn't get KGV in at Tier 8 without 15" guns or larger, well we have that now, so any arguments on that are settled, however the way Wargaming have gone around making the 15" guns is completely wrong. The current set up as the 15" gun upgrade bound with the hull B set up with the exact model of the 14" Mk VII is completely wrong, not just historically as Britain didn't plan a 4/2/4 15" gun set up, but the 15" guns wouldn't have fit in the Quadruple turrets in the first place, not because of the size of the breach oh no, they could fit that way, but it was the mounting, the mounting just wouldn't have been strong enough to withstand the force of a 15" gun.

 

The solution in this case is an easy one, detach the 15" guns from Hull B and give us the option to upgrade to 15" guns in a 3x3 set up from a Hull C upgrade, why the Hull C? Because in order to accommodate the 3x3 set up the KGV class would need to have had to have a refit, which would mean moving turret A forward to allow the increase in size necessary to facilitate the larger turret ring.

 

HMS Conqueror

 

Another ship I disagree with is Conqueror, yes I know, 18" guns are nice and all but why the Lion 16E-38 design which was meant for 4x3 16" guns rather than 4x2 18" guns? I really do not see where Wargaming's logic went with this one and I do hope it is in a better place because this is seriously my biggest issue here! There are, as I count, at least 4 ships we could get at Tier 8+ with 18" guns without relying on the 16E-38 design using guns it was originally designed to use, these are the M2, N3 and L3, plus the K3 Battlecruiser, yes they are all 1920s designs but Historical licence will allow these ships the proper modernisations to work at Tier 8, 9 and 10 respectively. And really, if any Battleship should come after Lion at Tier 9, it should be the 1945 B3 design which comes with better, faster firing guns, and heavier shell with a small lose to Muzzle Velocity, but in all it is the better choice at Tier 10 than HMS Conqueror and the 18" guns it was never designed to use if the 16E-38 design was ever built.

 

Yes I know, I have provided a lot of criticism so far in this thread, but apart from those 2 Battleships, which I am hopeful Wargaming will fix before actually releasing them (no chance of that happening obviously), I really do like the rest of the line and I do hope, I really really do hope, that Wargaming doesn't fall into the same trap they put themselves in with the FV215b (no not the 7,2" L4 variant, that actually existed as a Mockup, I mean the one with the Conqueror turret and 120mm gun).

 

P.S - If WG devs do read this, doubtful as it maybe, or any Mods that are able to pass on my feedback, can I also make the suggestion of naming one of the ships in the British line, not the ones in the current line but in the future Heavy Cruiser line, HMS Thunderchild in honour of the Torpedo Ram Ironclad from H.G Wells War of the Worlds, it would be a nice Easter egg for us Sci-fi nerds

[RUSSIANBlAS]

The KGV thing is a bit bad, considering the real thing performed well during WW2. No real reason to mess around with it's configuration, unless WG cannot think of a way around the lower calibre and the lack of overmatch. 

Maybe we'll find the 14" and 15" are both viable? Then everyone will be happy. Incidentally would the 15" be complete fantasy or another re-hash of that WW1 vintage on Warspite/Hood/Vanguard/lots of other stuff.

 

T10 looks fine to me, adds a different flavour to the BB line up as it's something new for T10. Did the RN even have a super BB in any sort of design during WW2? My understanding is all their huge BB designs were inter war...

[SeaMonsterUK]

The KGV thing is a bit bad, considering the real thing performed well during WW2. No real reason to mess around with it's configuration, unless WG cannot think of a way around the lower calibre and the lack of overmatch. 

 

Maybe we'll find the 14" and 15" are both viable? Then everyone will be happy. Incidentally would the 15" be complete fantasy or another re-hash of that WW1 vintage on Warspite/Hood/Vanguard/lots of other stuff.

 

T10 looks fine to me, adds a different flavour to the BB line up as it's something new for T10. Did the RN even have a super BB in any sort of design during WW2? My understanding is all their huge BB designs were inter war...

 

KGV was to use newer 15"/45 Mk II guns in some of the designs that came around as opposed to the 15"/42 Mk I and Mk I* from Warspite, Hood and Vanguard.

 

As for Super Battleships, we had several designs that came about just before and during world war 2, such as the 16E-38 design which, iirc, was designed in 1938 and to have had 12 16" Mk IIs in 4 3 gun turrets.

[RUSSIANBlAS]

 

As for Super Battleships, we had several designs that came about just before and during world war 2, such as the 16E-38 design which, iirc, was designed in 1938 and to have had 12 16" Mk IIs in 4 3 gun turrets.

 

Wouldn't that arguably feel a bit Monty like in this game?

 

I'm just a casual history buff, I am all for how the Conqueror looks but I'll agree KGV 15" looks like a bad batch of vodka amongst the designers. 

[Kartoffelmos]

As far as I can tell, the tier 10 is based on the L2 design, but with different superstructure and funnel (looking at the drawing, two separate funnels is not too far-fetched) layout. I'm not certain of the validity of this source (first page for drawings/data, last page for speculation), so a history buff will need to confirm:

 L2 860 feet, 52,100 tons, 70,000 shp, 8 x 18" 16 x 6"

 

 

[SeaMonsterUK]

As far as I can tell, the tier 10 is based on the L2 design, but with different superstructure and funnel/boiler layout. I'm not certain of the validity of this source (first page for drawings/data, last page for speculation), so a history buff will need to confirm:

 

 

 

From what I can find, people are saying it is either the L2, a beefed up Vanguard or the 16E-38 design. i'm willing to believe it is the 16E-38 due to the 5.25" DP guns.

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

Wouldn't that arguably feel a bit Monty like in this game?

 

I'm just a casual history buff, I am all for how the Conqueror looks but I'll agree KGV 15" looks like a bad batch of vodka amongst the designers. 

 

I wouldn't say I'm hardcore, but I'm pretty serious when it comes to ships and that Conqueror just doesn't sit well, certainly leaves a bad taste in my mouth considering the ships that could have been put in its place.

[RUSSIANBlAS]

 

I wouldn't say I'm hardcore, but I'm pretty serious when it comes to ships and that Conqueror just doesn't sit well, certainly leaves a bad taste in my mouth considering the ships that could have been put in its place.

 

Be interesting to see why WG have gone almost completely fantasy for T10. I think it's what I think, as in they just want to add some variety to T10 BBs. 

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

Be interesting to see why WG have gone almost completely fantasy for T10. I think it's what I think, as in they just want to add some variety to T10 BBs. 

 

If they wanted variety they've gone completely the wrong way haha.

[anonym_MfZ6T7iwWpUC]

Wondered how long it would be before we got this thread. 

 

Although I absolutely respect your opinion and your right to state it, I think you are completely wrong on the KGV. Putting a 'fictitious refit' on hull-c would be a travesty and would not be the KGV. If you want a fantasy ship at T8, then put one there and call it something else. You have backed yourself into a corner on the KGV and everybody on this forum knows it. Anything other than T7 with its 14" guns, and you would never accept it, no matter what. How about we actually play them for a month after they are released before deciding if they are a complete mess.

 

[RUSSIANBlAS]

 

If they wanted variety they've gone completely the wrong way haha.

 

Well the GK surprised me when it was announced...

 

I assumed KM BB would have been H39 then a bigger H of some sort as the Germans only ever had 2x4 designs I think?

 

WG's RN choices seem to have taken the opposite to what designs are out there.

 

It's almost like GK could have been tweaked into a RN BB and Conqueror tweaked for KM almost.... 

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

Well the GK surprised me when it was announced...

 

I assumed KM BB would have been H39 then a bigger H of some sort as the Germans only ever had 2x4 designs I think?

 

WG's RN choices seem to have taken the opposite to what designs are out there.

 

It's almost like GK could have been tweaked into a RN BB and Conqueror tweaked for KM almost.... 

 

The GK came about I believe because of insufficient data on the other H class ships, as well the lack of any actual designs on bigger guns.

[SeaMonsterUK]

Wondered how long it would be before we got this thread. 

 

Although I absolutely respect your opinion and your right to state it, I think you are completely wrong on the KGV. Putting a 'fictitious refit' on hull-c would be a travesty and would not be the KGV. If you want a fantasy ship at T8, then put one there and call it something else. You have backed yourself into a corner on the KGV and everybody on this forum knows it. Anything other than T7 with its 14" guns, and you would never accept it, no matter what. How about we actually play them for a month after they are released before deciding if they are a complete mess.

 

 

I haven't backed myself into a corner at all, real life performance of the 14" Mk VII found it to be lackluster at the best of times. That is why the 15" Mk I still remains the best gun the British used during the second World War. My conclusion was made based on real life results from engagements.

[csatahajos]

HMS King George V

 

As a lot of people know, I've said multiple times that we wouldn't get KGV in at Tier 8 without 15" guns or larger, well we have that now, so any arguments on that are settled, however the way Wargaming have gone around making the 15" guns is completely wrong. The current set up as the 15" gun upgrade bound with the hull B set up with the exact model of the 14" Mk VII is completely wrong, not just historically as Britain didn't plan a 4/2/4 15" gun set up, but the 15" guns wouldn't have fit in the Quadruple turrets in the first place, not because of the size of the breach oh no, they could fit that way, but it was the mounting, the mounting just wouldn't have been strong enough to withstand the force of a 15" gun.

 

The solution in this case is an easy one, detach the 15" guns from Hull B and give us the option to upgrade to 15" guns in a 3x3 set up from a Hull C upgrade, why the Hull C? Because in order to accommodate the 3x3 set up the KGV class would need to have had to have a refit, which would mean moving turret A forward to allow the increase in size necessary to facilitate the larger turret ring.

 

 

Ahh I did not know about the 15" B hull....any source for that? (The leaks I have seen onlym entioned the 14" historical variant. I'm with you on this though, the 14" turrets were never meant to take the bigger guns. Honestly with it's awesome armor I think KGV would make a fine ship at T8 even with 14" guns, just adjust the RoF and she will do fine, just as Scharnhorst does!

 

Also any hardcopy sources for this claim? "real life performance of the 14" Mk VII found it to be lackluster at the best of times."  According to all my sources the 14"/45 Mark VII was performing very well, ballistically about equal to the 15" Mark I. It was the quad turrets that gave a lot of headaches not the guns themselves! But this is a game anyway, if such things would be taken into acount as mounting design and teething troubles a lot of ships would perform whole differently...so it is unrealistic to ask for such considerations in a game.

 

 

On the Conqueror thingie: for those who still belive in the L2 theory...for lemonade's sake, look at the belt armor...all the 1921 serises capital ships had INTERNAL belts, just like Nelson. COnqueror shows external belts on all leaked pictures. Not to mention that the L2 was a single funnel ship with non alternating machinery whereas the 16E38 had alternating engine room/boiler room arrangement and two, well separated funels exactly for that reason!

 

Also it can not be Vanguard as the 18" turrets are much much bigger than the two gun mountings for the 15"/42 Mark I. She resembles Vanguard as the latter ship was designed in paralel to Lion as a faster version and to use the stored 15" turrets. So Vanguard inherited all the tems that were included in Lion's early war redesign, and obvously any actually built Lion variants would have got those features.

[RUSSIANBlAS]

 

I haven't backed myself into a corner at all, real life performance of the 14" Mk VII found it to be lackluster at the best of times. That is why the 15" Mk I still remains the best gun the British used during the second World War. My conclusion was made based on real life results from engagements.

 

A complete redesign like you suggested of KGV would be bad, worse than stuffing 15" fantasy guns into the existing turrets...

 

The WW1 vintage 15" gun was probably great for real world BB encounters. Any cannon that big landing a hit is going to do massive damage, regardless of the armour and gun modelling in this computer game... 

 

 

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

Ahh I did not know about the 15" B hull....any source for that? (The leaks I have seen onlym entioned the 14" historical variant. I'm with you on this though, the 14" turrets were never meant to take the bigger guns. Honestly with it's awesome armor I think KGV would make a fine ship at T8 even with 14" guns, just adjust the RoF and she will do fine, just as Scharnhorst does!

 

Also any hardcopy sources for this claim? "real life performance of the 14" Mk VII found it to be lackluster at the best of times."  According to all my sources the 14"/45 Mark VII was performing very well, ballistically about equal to the 15" Mark I. It was the quad turrets that gave a lot of headaches not the guns themselves! But this is a game anyway, if such things would be taken into acount as mounting design and teething troubles a lot of ships would perform whole differently...so it is unrealistic to ask for such considerations in a game.

 

 

On the Conqueror thingie: for those who still belive in the L2 theory...for lemonade's sake, look at the belt armor...all the 1921 serises capital ships had INTERNAL belts, just like Nelson. COnqueror shows external belts on all leaked pictures. Not to mention that the L2 was a single funnel ship with non alternating machinery whereas the 16E38 had alternating engine room/boiler room arrangement and two, well separated funels exactly for that reason!

 

Also it can not be Vanguard as the 18" turrets are much much bigger than the two gun mountings for the 15"/42 Mark I. She resembles Vanguard as the latter ship was designed in paralel to Lion as a faster version and to use the stored 15" turrets. So Vanguard inherited all the tems that were included in Lion's early war redesign, and obvously any actually built Lion variants would have got those features.

 

https://sea-group.org/?p=2999〈=en - That is the source I was given in another thread, as for your lackluster source I'll find that tomorrow when I'm more awake.

[Vaderan]

I can imagine KGV at both tiers (7 or 8) perform very well. It´s just a matter of adjustment. Seeing the Vanguard as a fitting tier 8 solution, a 14" guns KGV at tier 7 sounds completly reasonable. What doesn´t, though, is the fact that it appears to get 11900 AP alpha with 14" guns, which is more, than 15" guns on higher tiered ships get...

 

Putting anything else but 14" guns on KGV would completly ruin it´s flavour...

[SeaMonsterUK]

I can imagine KGV at both tiers (7 or 8) perform very well. It´s just a matter of adjustment. Seeing the Vanguard as a fitting tier 8 solution, a 14" guns KGV at tier 7 sounds completly reasonable. What doesn´t, though, is the fact that it appears to get 11900 AP alpha with 14" guns, which is more, than 15" guns on higher tiered ships get...

 

Putting anything else but 14" guns on KGV would completly ruin it´s flavour...

 

The 11'900AP I think comes from the 15" gun modification it gets with the B-hull.

[Vaderan]

Forgive my confusion, but afaik, KGV has been announced as a Tier 7 BB!? Did i miss some news, which state different? I found indeed some "news-sites" which claim KGV being tier 8, and indeed, those sites come around with even more confusing 15" guns for this ship, but i fail to find anything WG offizial, that says something different but KGV = tier 7.

Could you probably provide a source? Thanks in advance!

[RUSSIANBlAS]

Forgive my confusion, but afaik, KGV has been announced as a Tier 7 BB!? Did i miss some news, which state different? I found indeed some "news-sites" which claim KGV being tier 8, and indeed, those sites come around with even more confusing 15" guns for this ship, but i fail to find anything WG offizial, that says something different but KGV = tier 7.

Could you probably provide a source? Thanks in advance!

 

KGV is in ST.

 

No one is sure whether it's T7 or T8 yet. 

 

However from the sounds of it, there is already a BB lineup which suits KGVs place in T8...

[HotshotJimmy]

With all accuracy to history considered chaps I think we can put the changes down to gameplay decisions and not just wanting to annoy those who know about RN ships and their background. KGV I think will be a very good tier 8 no matter what guns she has. As we all know though...we'll just have to wait and see.

[Azalgor]

Why is everyone so fking surprised that WG sh its on history? Balance is everything, despite that theres no sign of it in the WG games since theyre releace...

 I dont have much knowledge on design of the RN ship, but what i do know, i s that KGV with 10 14" guns would not be a big issue on T8, Bismarck has 8 15'' guns, NC has 9 16" and amagi has 10 16" guns, since they give RN fantasy penetration, giving them few sec lower reload and it should be ok.

 The thing i do not agree is giving BB a radar, and the super heal that Yamato had once upon a time, that was nerfed to becoming standart because people say it was OP.

 WG smoked a lot of weed and drank to much when they designed the line, since they are making RN BB something that would be beter then they actually were, since the only way RN was able to win was because it had more ships than the enemy, while as in every fair engagements they sucked.

 

 

[creamgravy]

 

KGV is in ST.

 

No one is sure whether it's T7 or T8 yet. 

 

However from the sounds of it, there is already a BB lineup which suits KGVs place in T8...

 

Asia ST (SEA group) and RU ST (GM3D) are testing different 0.6.7 clients.

 

KGV is tier 8 on both. The 15" B-hull upgrade found on Asia is the big unknown (it could be a newer or older version)

[SeaMonsterUK]

 

Asia ST (SEA group) and RU ST (GM3D) are testing different 0.6.7 clients.

 

KGV is tier 8 on both. The 15" B-hull upgrade found on Asia is the big unknown (it could be a newer or older version)

 

Let us just hope it is an older version and we get the more realistic 3x3 15" gun.

[steviln]

T10 looks fine to me, adds a different flavour to the BB line up as it's something new for T10. Did the RN even have a super BB in any sort of design during WW2? My understanding is all their huge BB designs were inter war...

 

They did not have any serious plans for it. As the biggest and most experienced naval power, the understood how useless such ships would be before anyone else. They simply preferred to build more ships rather than more powerful ships.