HMS IRON DUKE

[Smudge014]

WG HMS IRON DUKE HAD 2 SMOKE STACKS NOT ONE

[EvilBob]

I'm going to say the picture you've seen of her in game is with a hypothetical upgrade. Maybe stock she has 2, upgraded 1.  In fact, looking at her ingame stats (as early as they are) her speed seems a little fast. So probably an engine upgrade?

[Jellicoe1916]

It is indeed a fictional rebuild, just like what Kaiser, Konig and Bayern all have. I'm actually glad they haven't gave Orion one, just stuck some more guns on her WW1 Hull, expected her to be rebuilt fictionally aswell

As she was Jellicoes flagship at jutland I would like the WW1 as the stock hull instead, just like how Bayern has her WW1 Hull then the fictional rebuild 

[Johan_Jung]

Another fantasty upgrade? Pls, give us the stock hull as well!

Iron Duke lasted quite long incl ww2 (guard ship at Scapa Flow?). Maybe she was not modernized enough to suit the game...

[philjd]

38 minutes ago, Johan_Jung said:

Another fantasty upgrade? Pls, give us the stock hull as well!

Iron Duke lasted quite long incl ww2 (guard ship at Scapa Flow?). Maybe she was not modernized enough to suit the game...

 

While she may have lasted well into WW2.. she was partially disarmed as per the 1930 naval treaty and restricted to a Training ship role - in much better state than HMS Centurion who also lasted a similar time span (1911 KGV class) was even decked out as a fake HMS Howe at one time then scuttled as a breakwater at Normandy.

[Tuccy]

the "One smokestack" is generally taking the same upgrade as done on Queen Elizabeths with new engines and boilers. While this is not the "Jutland" look, it is done to have the ships competitive in their tiers. As you saw recently in the US and Japanese trees, the historical stock hulls were pretty painful to get through and int he end we have opted to remove them (or use them for lower tier Premiums), with newer trees we opt to go game balance first while designing the tree already, including hypothetical upgrades (based on comparable things done to other similar ships - int his case QE's).

[chazwozza]

why not use the fantasy look as standard and the real look as the upgrade?

[EvilBob]

Just looking back at that second picture, i'm now wanting a launch barrage balloon consumable! 

[WestyII]

26 minutes ago, Tuccy said:

the "One smokestack" is generally taking the same upgrade as done on Queen Elizabeths with new engines and boilers. While this is not the "Jutland" look, it is done to have the ships competitive in their tiers. As you saw recently in the US and Japanese trees, the historical stock hulls were pretty painful to get through and int he end we have opted to remove them (or use them for lower tier Premiums), with newer trees we opt to go game balance first while designing the tree already, including hypothetical upgrades (based on comparable things done to other similar ships - int his case QE's).

Pretty sad that power creep has had such a negative effect on the game.

Would love to see a Jutland mode, to allow these dreadnoughts to have place and purpose. 

[T0byJug]

1 minute ago, WestyII said:

Pretty sad that power creep has had such a negative effect on the game.

Would love to see a Jutland mode, to allow these dreadnoughts to have place and purpose. 

Hay theres an IDEA....

@Tuccy   How about a new game mode for low tier 3-6 Battlewaggans. WW1

 

Ships as they would have been 1918

 

[Tuccy]

6 minutes ago, WestyII said:

Pretty sad that power creep has had such a negative effect on the game.

Would love to see a Jutland mode, to allow these dreadnoughts to have place and purpose. 

It's not really a case of power creep - it is more of having the tech tree and having comfortable progress :) Either you have to have hypothetical upgrades or you have gaps in 1930s. While on the same tier you have the Kongo class of fast battleships (ie after the refits), and New Yorks (again, with their WWII upgrades), which make them... Well, still kinda weak if outtiered, but at least with some AA capabilities. Throwing into that Iron Dukes (or stock QEs or Revenges if you like) with very limited AA would not be too enjoyable, onthe other hand interwar AA upgrades would require major changes in superstructure (at least on the Warspite level, even if you do not go full hog like QE) and these would likely be accompanied by propulsion and protection upgrades... Etc. So if it is power creep, i am afraid you have to blame the Japanese and Americans for it ;)

[Jellicoe1916]

1 hour ago, Tuccy said:

It's not really a case of power creep - it is more of having the tech tree and having comfortable progress :) Either you have to have hypothetical upgrades or you have gaps in 1930s. While on the same tier you have the Kongo class of fast battleships (ie after the refits), and New Yorks (again, with their WWII upgrades), which make them... Well, still kinda weak if outtiered, but at least with some AA capabilities. Throwing into that Iron Dukes (or stock QEs or Revenges if you like) with very limited AA would not be too enjoyable, onthe other hand interwar AA upgrades would require major changes in superstructure (at least on the Warspite level, even if you do not go full hog like QE) and these would likely be accompanied by propulsion and protection upgrades... Etc. So if it is power creep, i am afraid you have to blame the Japanese and Americans for it ;)

I think a Malaya style funnel would've been more likely by trunking the 2 into 1 

[philjd]

26 minutes ago, EvilBob said:

Just looking back at that second picture, i'm now wanting a launch barrage balloon consumable! 

Observation balloons on ships were tried before and during in WW1. Two big problems with the idea.

 

1) Tow rope/chain kept snapping (parent ship couldn't go very fast either).

2) the balloon crew got airsick due to the vibration - all of them, all of the time, no exceptions apparently (from what I have read - it's not exactly a major topic in any book). Difficult to do anything meaningful when you are chucking up.

 

While not quite barrage balloons, I guess the situation is similar :)

[EvilBob]

34 minutes ago, Tuccy said:

Etc. So if it is power creep, i am afraid you have to blame the Japanese and Americans for it ;)

 

The only people to blame for this are those that signed the washington naval treaty.  The RN at the end of WWI had A LOT of excess tonnage. To meet this agreement they only kept the very best of her fleet. Iron Duke class, even though it was relatively modern, just wasn't the ships they wanted to keep. So instead of upgrading them, they were removed from the active roster. 

The RN had the Resolutions, QE's, Renowns etc... far better keep these 'better' ships to pad out her allowed tonnage than the iron dukes :-(

 

The Japanese and Americans didn't share the same problem.  The americans were playing catch up (and the treaty was a massive political win in achieving this) so didn't need to lose as much tonnage, and the Japanese didn't have no were near the excess ships.

[WestyII]

2 minutes ago, Tuccy said:

snip

CVs have added such complexity to the game balance. I honestly thought they wouldn't appear till T6 when WOWS was announced.

I appreciate WG are between a rock and a hard place, but I dislike the hypothetical refits, and would much prefer a different solution. 

However I disagree, there are elements of powercreep. It comes down to WG giving New York and Kongo their 1930s refit at Tier 5, if they had been kept as at 1918 Tier 5 could have been balanced nicely for a "Jutland Tier". Tier 6 could have had NY and Kongo upgrades. (This is all too late now, but that is where the problem stems from.)

[philjd]

17 minutes ago, Tuccy said:

It's not really a case of power creep ..............., i am afraid you have to blame the Japanese and Americans for it ;)

If not for Pearl harbour and the opportunity to rebuild those grounded by teh attack, I do wonder how much of an upgrade the 'standards' etc would have received if they were in constant use.

[Combat_Hamster]

11 minutes ago, Jellicoe1916 said:

I think a Malaya style funnel would've been more likely by trunking the 2 into 1 

This would look so  much  better,  and  be  more  accurate,  bearing in mind  where the original  funnel  uptakes  would  be....In reality I think Iron Duke  would have been  the oldest  battleship worth a  rebuild,  I think  Orion  should  have  had  single  4"  AA  as  she would  probably  have  been  reconstructed  before  twin mountings  came  out,  perhaps  given  her  6.  With  reference  to Dreadnought..premium yes..but  she lacked  the upper  belt  which would be a  drawback..and  s  the only battleship to sink a  sub

[WestyII]

To be honest, this stuff makes me laugh. When everyone was asking where the RN was, WG trotted out the excuse that they were delayed due to the cost of accurate plans...

[G01ngToxicCommand0]

1 hour ago, WestyII said:

CVs have added such complexity to the game balance. I honestly thought they wouldn't appear till T6 when WOWS was announced.

I appreciate WG are between a rock and a hard place, but I dislike the hypothetical refits, and would much prefer a different solution. 

However I disagree, there are elements of powercreep. It comes down to WG giving New York and Kongo their 1930s refit at Tier 5, if they had been kept as at 1918 Tier 5 could have been balanced nicely for a "Jutland Tier". Tier 6 could have had NY and Kongo upgrades. (This is all too late now, but that is where the problem stems from.)

A fully upgraded late war Kongo might even had been placed as a tier 7 while placing Nagato on tier 8 and the Amagi at tier 9.

[stockyy1994]

The real problems with the stock hulls for the old IJN and USN BB's were that they used the WW1 era guns/shells, and couldn't penetrate anything, why not just keep the historical look of the stock hulls, but give the ships the upgraded guns.

[anonym_MfZ6T7iwWpUC]

4 hours ago, Smudge014 said:

WG HMS IRON DUKE HAD 2 SMOKE STACKS NOT ONE

And the Queen Elizabeth class had two......until they received the significant upgrade for WW2 and then had just one. So WG have given it a fictitious upgrade in order for it to be semi-competitive against higher BB's. I am sure the base hull will be as original, so you can still sail around quite happily with your two funnels.

[WestyII]

 

16 minutes ago, atomskytten said:

A fully upgraded late war Kongo might even had been placed as a tier 7 while placing Nagato on tier 8 and the Amagi at tier 9.

 

Yup, and removed some fantasy ships in the meantime. I always imagined the later Tiers like this:

Tier 5 - WW1
Tier 6 - Interwar (+ First Carriers)
Tier 7 - Big 7
Tier 8 - Treaty BBs
Tier 9 - Post Treaty / Late WW2
Tier 10 - Yamato

[Gnomus]

5 hours ago, Tuccy said:

the "One smokestack" is generally taking the same upgrade as done on Queen Elizabeths with new engines and boilers. While this is not the "Jutland" look, it is done to have the ships competitive in their tiers. As you saw recently in the US and Japanese trees, the historical stock hulls were pretty painful to get through and int he end we have opted to remove them (or use them for lower tier Premiums), with newer trees we opt to go game balance first while designing the tree already, including hypothetical upgrades (based on comparable things done to other similar ships - int his case QE's).

 

Some ships need imaginary upgrades, especially on AA, to make them work in game. I just hope that imaginary part would be kept to minimum.

 

Changes on shells, turret turn rate etc. doesn't need change on turret looks. Change of machinery doesn't need change of funnels (even if change could be possible or even likely). Adding AA needs some changes on superstructure and secondaries.

 

Just because ships would need imaginary engine and AA upgrade doesn't mean you need to change it's basic lines and outlook. When change is needed, do it, but otherwise I would prefer keeping ships in their historical outlook. German low/mid tier BB's didn't need such drastic changes. Iron Duke would have worked just fine with two funnels. It would have looked like real Iron Duke even with overabundance of AA guns.

 

 

Please keep imaginary (visual) changes minimal on true historical ships.

[Shirakami_Kon]

More "what if"s... I'm getting really tired of all this, I loved this game because it was decently accurate with the ships for the most part. Thing that every line throws out of the window more... If you can't make a whole line of ships comfortable enough don't do a whole line and do what you can, but respect how the ships were like you used to. Please.

 

What's next? Release Conqueror with that stupid heal and range because now we can ignore that Yamato was the biggest and strongest BB in the world and that after sinking her everyone agreed that BBs were a thing of the past and no one would ever build again a BB that huge to not repeat such a massacre just for one ship so obviously the RN would have stick to that plan with the Conqueror? Implement in the game something even more ridiculous than Yamato? Will you give it 10'6 km secondary range without upgrades while you're at it? Will that premium RN BB still be the Monarch? And will you repeat the Gneisenau mistake with the KGV?

 

Good... Well done...

[RUSSIANBlAS]

I agree with Tuccy here.

 

The painful but historically accurate Hull A ships were a pain to grind and it's got nothing to do with power creep. Most of us likely knew no better at that stage of our WoWS experience...

 

Can see why some want competitive but accurate models as visuals do make a difference. Like how Tiger 131 in WoT is a blast because it's a historically accurate Tiger or one of your favorite ships here makes things that bit more fun.