Improve the Tirpitz

[dennis_blundell]

Ticket #2040380

Category:

World of Warships

Sub-category:

Game mechanics  improove 

Dear Team,
I have read comments about the warship Tirpitz, and I have written to you before giving you the true statistics of the ship. I do feel that you need to tweak the settings of this warship with regards to its armour and to its fire power. It does feel unfair that most of the ships in your game act very nearly as the real ships that it represents by scale. I have asked a master gunner to use the set naval equations to levitate the true capacities and dimensions of the vessel the Tirpitz in relation to your game. The firing range of the Tirpitz was around 31.7 nautical miles depending on the wind flow gusts and shells used, the firing displacement of each shell varied depending on atmospheric gusts and electrostatic molecules made from air rasping or kinetic energy , ,, Where.. : : :  : :  : : . Using this method can be worked out to help to set objectives into real life statistics within your game ....    :   :   :  .....to calculate distance :  ;   :  Just a unpretentious sample. All these factors played their part, however, based on the dispersion of shells in your game, using it in real life and time would mean, that the dispersion of the projectile shells fired by the Tirpitz in the game based and remember, based  in real time, would have a dispersion of around 0.220.NM miles from the target ship. To make sense of it all, your game shell dispersion to real time, shell cut would be around 0.220NYS miles landing from the target ship, where in real time, it had a dispersion of 156.7yd radius, based on a 30 mile salvo. Here is one of many of our naval charts giving further information..

Gun Characteristics....

1. The weight figure above was for early production weapons. Later weapons were 661 lbs. (300 kg) lighter.
2. Siegfried guns built for coastal defense had a larger chamber volume of 22,072 in³(361.7 dm³) and shorter rifling length of 620 in (15.748 m).
3. Many references claim that this was the fastest firing large caliber gun ever built. The ROF figures listed above represent generally published data that would support that claim. However, Krupp official documents cite the ROF as being 26 seconds at a four degree elevation, not notably faster than that of other nations' large-caliber weapons. Note that at this elevation the range would be considerably less than 10,000 meters. It is possible that well trained gun crews would reduce this time to the 20 seconds necessary to meet a ROF of 3 times per minute. A May 1941 report by the German Artillery Versuch Kommando - AVSK (Artillery Testing Command for Ships) stated that the turret ammunition hoists on Bismarck were capable of delivering between 23 and 25 rounds per minute (for all four turrets), the equivalent of 3 rounds per minute per gun. However, this same report stated that design faults in the hoists led to two significant breakdowns during the evaluation, both of which caused long interruptions in the ammunition supply. Finally, it should be noted that Bismarck fired a total of 91 rounds during her thirteen minutes of firing at the Denmark Strait battle, which is actually less than one round per gun per minute.

	38 cm (14.96") SK C/34
	Bismarck and Schlachtschiff "O" Classes  Gneisenau as planned to be rebuilt Soviet Kronstadt class
	1934
	1939
	Including breech mechanism: 244,713 lbs. (111,000 kg)
	772.8 in. (19.630 m)
	724.6 in. (18.405 m)
	629.2 in. (15.982 m)
	(90) 0.177 in deep x 0.306 in (4.5 mm x 7.76 mm)
	0.217 in (5.5 mm)
	Increasing RH 1 in 36 to 1 in 30
	19,467 in3 (319 dm3)
	2.3 to 3 rounds per minute

Ammunition.....

1. These guns, like most large caliber German guns, used a "fore charge" which was propellant in a silk bag, and a "main charge" which was propellant in a brass case. The brass case helped to seal the breech of the gun.
2. With the lighter coastal artillery projectiles, barrel life increased to nearly 350 rounds.
3. This is the design figure and probably reflects only shell room storage. "German Warships 1815-1945" says that the actual outfit ranged from 112 to 120 rounds while "German Capital Ships of World War Two" says the outfit was 130 rounds per gun. These latter figures most likely include "ready rounds" stored in the handling rooms and gunhouses.
4. APC and HE ballistic caps had a radius of 10 calibers.
5. Fore and Main charges were rammed together.
6. Actual Projectile designations were as follows: 
      APC L/4,4 - Psgr. L/4,4 (mhb) 
      HE L/4,5 base fuze - Spr.gr. L/4,5 Bdz (mhb) 
      HE L/4,6 nose fuze - Spr.gr. L/4,6 Kz (mhb) 
      Siegfried HE L/4,5 - Si.gr. L/4,5 Bdz u. Kz (mhb) 
      CA SAP L/4,4 - Spr.gr. L/4,4 Bdz u. Kz (mhb)
7. These ships did not carry WGr4592 projectiles with shaped-charge warheads.

              

	Cartridge - Bag
	Ship Projectiles     APC L/4,4 - 1,764 lbs. (800 kg)     HE L/4,5 base fuze - 1,764 lbs. (800 kg)     HE L/4,6 nose fuze - 1,764 lbs. (800 kg) Special Coastal Artillery Projectiles     Siegfried HE L/4,5 - 1,091 lbs. (495 kg)     HE L/4,4 base and nose fuze - 1,124 lbs. (510 kg)
	APC L/4,4 - 41.4 lbs. (18.8 kg)  HE L/4,5 base fuze - 71.9 lbs. (32.6 kg)  HE L/4,6 nose fuze - 141.5 lbs. (64.2 kg) Others: N/A
	APC L/4,4 - 65.8 in (167.2 cm)  HE L/4,5 base fuze - 67.3 in (171.0 cm)  HE L/4,6 nose fuze - 68.8 in (174.8 cm) Siegfried HE L/4,5 - 67.3 in (171.0 cm)  HE L/4,4 base and nose fuze - 65.8 in (167.2 cm)
	Fore: 219.4 lbs. (99.5 kg) RPC/38 (17/7)  Main: 248.0 lbs. (112.5 kg) RPC/38 (17/7)  Brass case for main charge: 154 lbs. (70 kg)
	For naval shells: 2,690 fps (820 mps)  For coastal artillery shells: 3,445 fps (1,050 mps)
	20.3 tons/in2 (3,200 kg/cm2)
	180 - 210 rounds
	108 rounds

Range....

Range of projectiles fired at new gun muzzle velocities
Elevation	With APC	Striking Velocity	Angle of Fall
2.2 degrees	5,470 yards (5,000 m)	2,385 fps (727 mps)	2.4
4.9 degrees	10,940 yards (10,000 m)	2,103 fps (641 mps)	5.8
8.1 degrees	16,400 yards (15,000 m)	1,864 fps (568 mps)	10.4
12.1 degrees	21,870 yards (20,000 m)	1,677 fps (511 mps)	16.4
16.8 degrees	27,340 yards (25,000 m)	1,552 fps (473 mps)	23.8
22.4 degrees	32,810 yards (30,000 m)	1,499 fps (457 mps)	31.9
29.1 degrees	38,280 yards (35,000 m)	1,516 fps (462 mps)	40.3
30 degrees  (maximum elevation of turret)	39,589 yards (36,520 m)	---	---
52 degrees  (as coastal artillery)	45,932 yards (42,000 m)	---	---

Time of flight for APC Shell with MV = 2,690 fps (820 mps) 
   10,940 yards (10,000 m): 13.9 seconds 
   21,870 yards (20,000 m): 32.0 seconds 
   32,810 yards (30,000 m): 55.5 seconds 
   38,280 yards (35,000 m): 69.9 seconds 

Range of projectiles fired at new gun muzzle velocitiesElevationWith HEStriking VelocityAngle of Fall52 degrees 
(as coastal artillery)60,000 yards (54,900 m)------

Armor Penetration with AP....

Range	Side Armor	Deck Armor
0 yards (0 m)	29.23" (742 mm)	---
5,000 yards (4,572 m)	24.26" (616 mm)	0.76" (19.3 mm)
19,685 yards (18,000 m)	16.50" (419 mm)	2.96" (75.0 mm)
24,060 yards (22,000 m)	15.49" (393 mm)	4.15" (104 mm)
29,528 yards (27,000 m)	11.98" (304 mm)	5.02" (126 mm)

The above information is from "Battleships: Axis and Neutral Battleships in World War II" for a muzzle velocity of 2,690 fps (820 mps) and is based upon the USN Empirical Formula for Armor Penetration.

Range	Side Armor	Deck Armor
10,936 yards (10,000 m)	20.08" (510 mm)	---
21,872 yards (20,000 m)	14.33" (364 mm)	---
22,966 yards (21,000 m)	13.78" (350 mm)	---
27,340 yards (25,000 m)	12.13" (308 mm)	---
32,808 yards (30,000 m)	---	about 4.70" (120 mm)
38,276 yards (35,000 m)	---	about 6.69" (170 mm)

The above information is from "German Capital Ships of World War Two" for a muzzle velocity of 2,690 fps (820 mps) and is based upon German (side) and homogenous (deck) armor penetration curves.

 

Mount/Turret Data....

1. These turrets were electrically powered for main training, auxiliary training, auxiliary elevation, auxiliary hoists and reserve power for some of the loading gear, otherwise they were hydraulically powered by two electrically driven pumps in each turret. Run out was pneumatic. Emergency hand elevation equipment was provided.
2. As in all large German mountings, these turrets were supported by ball bearings, not the tapered rollers preferred by other nations. Shell rooms were below the magazines. All four turrets originally had 10.5 m (34 feet 5 inches) rangefinders, but the one on turret Anton was removed following water damage inflicted during the winter of 1940/1941.
3. Distance between gun axes was 147.6 in (375 cm).
4. Each gun was served by a shell cage driven by hydraulic cylinders with rack and pinion drive of a wire drum. The shell cage picked up the charge cage on its way to the gunhouse. The shell cage carried the main and fore charges end to end on a single tray. The hoists came up between the guns and the shells were transferred to the loading tray by rammers. As the shell was transferred, the charges were moved to a waiting cage. After the shell was loaded, the waiting cage moved down to the level of the loading tray. The space between them was bridged by a ramp and the charges were then rolled into the loading tray. Both charges were rammed together. The auxiliary hoists lifted shells and propellant one after the other in a vertical position and came up to the rear of each gun. These were transferred to a tiltable cage and could be then loaded by the main rammer. A manual rammer which required between ten to fourteen crewmen to operate was provided as a backup.
5. There were at least five and perhaps as many as ten ready rounds stored in the back of each turret.
6. RPC was fitted for elevation but not for training. This elevation control was considered to be unsatisfactory in Bismarck.
7. Turret Anton had a unique rotary cartridge ejection system, an improvement to water tightness over the simpler flap-cover used on previous ships and on Bismarck's other three turrets. The flap-cover designs had proved inadequate on the bow turrets of Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, allowing water ingress during their engagement in heavy seas with the British battlecruiser Renown on 9 April 1940.
8. Armor thickness for the Bismarck class as given in "Anatomy of the Ship: The Battleship Bismarck" by Jack Brower: 
       Lower Face: 14.2 in (36 cm) KC 
       Upper Face: 7.1 in (18 cm) KC                   
       Lower Sides: 8.7 in (22 cm) KC 
       Upper Sides: 5.9 in (15 cm) KC 
       Lower Rear: 12.6 in (32 cm) KC 
       Upper Rear: 7.1 in (18 cm) KC 
       Roof: 5.1 in (13 cm) KC

Designation	Two-gun Turrets     Bismarck (4), Gneisenau (3) and "O" (3): Drh LC/34    Kronstadt (3): Drh LC/34
Weight	2,319,253 lbs. (1,052,000 kg)
Elevation	-5.5 / +30 degrees  Coastal artillery: -3 / +55 or more degrees
Elevation Rate	6 degrees per second
Train	-145 / +145 degrees
Train Rate	5 degrees per second
Gun recoil	41.3 in (1.050 m)
Loading Angle	+2.5 degrees

Battleship Main Guns....

406 mm/50 Pattern 1937

Sovetskii Soyuz Class

16"/45 Pattern 1914,
406 mm/45 Pattern 1914

1914 Battleship Projects

15"/42 Mark I (Britain)

Archangelsk (ex-HMS Royal Sovereign)

38 cm/52 SK C/34 (Germany)

Kronshtadt Class (Project 69)

14"/52 Pattern 1913,
356 mm/52 Pattern 1913

Izmail Class

305 mm/62 Pattern 1948

Stalingrad Class

305 mm/55 B-36 Pattern 1937,
305 mm/55 B-50 Pattern 1940

1937 Light Battleship (Project 25) 
Kronshtadt Class (Project 69)

12"/52 Pattern 1907,
305 mm/52 Pattern 1907

Gangut, Imperatritsa Maria and Imperator Nikolai I Classes                                                                                                                      

12"/40 Pattern 1895,
305 mm/40 Pattern 1895

Borodino Class and Sissoi

12"/35 Pattern 1886,
305 mm/35 Pattern 1886

Chesma Class, Georgy Pobedonosets Class and Navarin

12"/30 Pattern 1877,
305 mm/30 Pattern 1877

Ekaterina II Class, Alexander II Class, Gangut and Dvenadtsat' Apostolov

10"/50 Pattern 1908,
254 mm/50 Pattern 1908

Rurik (II)

10"/45 Pattern 1891,
254 mm/45 Pattern 1891

Pobeda, Admiral Apraksin and 

Cruiser / Destroyer Main Guns and Battleship / Cruiser Secondary Guns....

9"/35 Pattern 1877,
229 mm/35 Pattern 1877

Imperator Alexandr II class and Gangut

220 mm/65 SM-40

Pr. 22 and Pr. 66 Heavy Cruiser Classes

20.3 cm/60 SK C/34

Petropavlovsk (ex-German Lützow)

8"/50 Pattern 1905,
203 mm/50 Pattern 1905

Rurik (II), Andrey Pervozvanny Class, Evstafii Class, Sinop and Petr Veliky

8"/45 Pattern 1892,
203 mm/45 Pattern 1892

Rossia, Gromoboy, Bayan(I), Bayan(II) Class and gunboat Khrabry

8"/35 Pattern 1885,
203 mm/35 Pattern 1885

Admiral Nakhimov, Pamiat' Azova, Rurik and Koreets Class gunboats

180 mm/60 Pattern 1931,
180 mm/57 Pattern 1932

Krasnyi Kavkaz and Kirov Classes

152 mm/57 Pattern 1938

Sovetskii Soyuz , Chapayev and Sverdlov Classes

6"/50 Pattern 1908,
152 mm/50 Pattern 1908

Schkval Class river monitors

6"/45 Pattern 1892,
152 mm/45 Pattern 1877

Most large ships built between 1892 and 1911

6"/35 Pattern 1877,
152 mm/35 Pattern 1877

Pre-dreadnoughts and armored cruisers

130 mm/58 Pattern 1957

Neustrashimy, Kotlin and Luda (PRC) Classes

130 mm/50 Pattern 1936

Leningrad, Silnyi, Gnevnyi, Storozhevoi, Opitnyi, Tashkent and Ognyevoi Classes

130 mm/55 Marks A and B,
130 mm/55 Pattern 1913

Imperatritsa Maria class, Diana, Bogatyr class, Prut, Khrabry, Grozyaschii, Aurora, Komintern, Chervona Ukraina and Krasnyi Krym Classes

120 mm/50 Pattern 1905

Gangut Class and Rurik (II)

120 mm/45 Pattern 1892

Many ships of the 1890s - 1900s

4"/60 Pattern 1911,
102 mm/60 Pattern 1911

Many ships 1912 - 1917

102 mm/45 Pattern 1930 and 1934

Dekabrist and Leninets Classes and river monitors

100 mm/70 CM-5

Chapaev and Sverdlov Classes

100 mm/56 Pattern 1940

Sovetskii Soyuz, Chapayev and Kirov Classes

100 mm/51 Pattern 1936,
100 mm/56 Pattern 1939

Submarines and small combatants

100 mm/50 "Minizini" (Italian)

Smaller Caliber and Anti-Aircraft Guns....

85 mm/52 90K

Kaganovich, Kalinin and Skoryy Classes

76.2 mm/59 AK-726

Kiev, Kara, Kynda and Kashin Classes

76.2 mm/55 Pattern 1935

Gangut, Krasnyi Kavkaz, Leningrad and Type 7 Classes

12-pdr / 20cwt QF HA (Britain)

B1 submarines (ex-British "S" and "U" class)

76.2 mm/30 Pattern 1914/15

Many battleships and cruisers

75 mm/50 Pattern 1892

Most warships built between 1892 and 1920

2.5"/38 Pattern 1916,
63.3 mm/38 Pattern 1916

Most Battleships of World War I

57 mm/81 ZIF-71 and ZIF-75

Modified Skoryy, Kildin and Krupny Classes

57 mm/78.7 SM-24-ZIF and ZIF-31

Submarines, Skoryy, Kanin and Kildin Classes

57 mm (6-pdr.)

Many Warships 1904 - 1914

47 mm (3-pdr.)

Many Warships 1884 - 1920

45 mm/68 21-KM

Many Warships 1942 - 1947

45 mm/46 AA 21-K

Many Warships 1932 - 1947

40 mm/56.3 Bofors (USA)

Many Ships 1942 - 1950

40 mm/39 Vickers (British)

Many Ships 1916 - 1918

37 mm/67 70-K

Many Warships 1942 - 1965

1-pdr (37 mm) Hotchkiss

Many Warships 1880 - 1920s

1-pdr Maxim,
37 mm Maxim

A few ships 1880 - 1920s

25 mm/79 110-PM

Submarines and small craft

25 mm/76 84-KM

Light Craft

23 mm/87 ZU-23

Light Craft

23 mm/71 VYa

MTBs

23 mm/60

Light Craft

23 mm AN23

MTBs and Patrol Ships

20 mm/70 Oerlikon (USA)

Many Ships 1942 - 1950

14.5 mm/93 2M-7

Patrol Ships

0.50"/90 BMG M2 (USA)

Many Ships 1942 - 1950

0.50"/62 MG Mark III (British)

Many Ships 1942 - 1950

7.62 mm Maxim MG

Many Ships 1900 - 1950

I hope this makes sense to you, I have to apologise because I wrote this in a hurry. I hope you can now see why people do not purchase the Tirpitz so often in your game anymore, if you were to read your own remarks of your subscribers then you would realise the injustice you have made on the construction of the warship the Tirpitz. If this paper is has not helped you in anyway then please just leave your comments and I will refrain from writing anymore. 
Best Regards Dennis ( Blundell

 

[Commander_Cornflakes]

This is an arcade game, not a simulation. The ships look nice, but that's it. Everything else will be changed so Wargaming thinks it's balanced.

And Tirpitz is still the second most used ship in Tier 8 (after Bismarck).

[RUSSIANBlAS]

Tirp had a secondary buff recently so there is literally no need for a Bismarck unless you want a few more % extra AA and hydro.

 

It's an excellent in game ship already and you'll be lucky to see any more improvements. 

[Kruzenstern]

The problem with the Tirpitz is not the ship, it is its players...

And sorry to say, but you OP are part of the problem, you are one of the worst players I have had the questionable pleasure of seeing in this game. 98 battles in the Tirpitz and 13K avg damage? Either you are botting, or you have some serious deficiency. In any case you should not be driving a Tirpitz at all. Players like you are what makes this game so bad despite it having so much potential. Regrettably players like you are also what pays most of WGs bills...

Regardless, the Tirpitz does not need improvement. Your skills (or lack thereof) do...

[VC381]

We have to accept this is a game and some things won't be realistic. All battleships only fire to ~20km as that's how the developers decided the maximum range will be. No ship in game fires at the physical maximum range of the guns in real life (except maybe Fletcher with AFT and range module).

 

Actually apart from that, the shell characteristics are simplified but overall quite good at the ranges the games take place.

 

I admire your interest in history and your research efforts, I also wish sometimes some parts of the game were a bit more realistic.

 

But you've touched a nerve because Tirpitz in game is a ship many consider a bit too strong, that is also played badly by a lot of people who just buy it before they really understand the game. I'll try not to be as rude as the guy before me, but basically forget everything you think you know or what you believe the game should be like. Enjoy the game for what it is (the 3D models are gorgeous, the action is fast paced and fun) and go practice in a lower tier ship until you understand the game as a game.

[_DeathWing_]

"Improve the Tirpitz"

 

lol

 

Bold move there. How dare you!

 

13k average dmg  Why though?

 

Alabama 19k, Scharnhorst 12k, Texas 15k and Mutsu 6k! Why are you buying premiums when you don't understand the mechanics of the game?

[almitov]

Everything that needed to be said was already said...

 

Buying premium ships is a good way to cut the credits grind and train a beast of a commander, but from what I see OP has started with the premiums. This is a bad move in general - you will typically face high-tier seasoned players while not really knowing the game mechanics, maps and ship behavior. This (as we can see from your stats) typically ends badly and you will get insults and hate from your team.

 

If you want to play BBs, start from a low-tier one and grind your way up. Until you get to T10, you will usually know what to do in different situations and it will be a lot easier for you to adapt to other BBs. Tirpitz is a beast, but errors in judgement can be punished very hard in it. However, the german BB line is (imho) the easiest to play, as they are quite tanky and with good-to-great secondaries. Start from Nassau and grind up if you like this play-style and by the time you get to Bismarck, you will already have a lot better results in the Tirpitz as well.

[Exocet6951]

Buys the Shiny Horst, Torpitz, Alabama, and Prinz Eugen despite having less than 400 games, predictable massively fails, asks for buffs.

 

This is why we have OP premiums, turtleback, ridiculous secondaries and citadels below the waterline.

[Lieutenant_Hubert_Gruber]

Great ship! Buff it, and you kill the great balance between tier 8 bbs! Not including the RN bb, since I dont know how it fits in.

 

I would even argue that the buff to secondary guns weren't need. 

 

Love the tirp, but don't expect that the ship alone wins battles

 

[RUSSIANBlAS]

 

This is with my stealth Tirp, e.g no secondary buffs and all modules to main guns and concealment.

 

AP only too.

 

First game had a Taiho trying his luck and my float plane with Manual AA got rid of him.

 

An excellent ship still even with Bismarck and RN Power Creep...

 

 

[veslingr]

On 9/7/2017 at 7:33 AM, Negativvv said:

Tirp had a secondary buff recently so there is literally no need for a Bismarck unless you want a few more % extra AA and hydro.

 

It's an excellent in game ship already and you'll be lucky to see any more improvements. 

Tirp is now competetive ship and news no buffa. 

 

P.s.

I would change his torpedos for Herman hydro in a hearthbeat :)

[ShinGetsu]

16 minutes ago, veslingr said:

Tirp is now competetive ship and news no buffa. 

 

P.s.

I would change his torpedos for Herman hydro in a hearthbeat :)

I wouldn't change her torpedoes for hydro AND radar combined. Those torps are tools of mass murder on Tirpitz.

[_VAMPA_]

30 minutes ago, veslingr said:

Tirp is now competetive ship and news no buffa. 

 

P.s.

I would change his torpedos for Herman hydro in a hearthbeat :)

well than why u spend money for premium ship than just get Bismark hydro there

and manual secondarys that dont need you to point @target

what u need radar for.. in Tirpitz - u have bow

13 minutes ago, ShinGetsu said:

I wouldn't change her torpedoes for hydro AND radar combined. Those torps are tools of mass murder on Tirpitz.

 

Yes capable yolo boat for every moment that you need 2more Mils need torpedoes

 

which leads me to.....no no torpedoes for Missouri its unrealistic

Spoiler

......just 4 ABLs x 4Tomahawks she will be balanced...historic accurate is 8x4

 

only thing that i would trade is that Tirpitz stock camo (Type 10 - Tirpitz)    -  that i dont use for camo (skin) my Missouri to looks as after modernization in 1984

Spoiler

 

[veslingr]

3 hours ago, ShinGetsu said:

I wouldn't change her torpedoes for hydro AND radar combined. Those torps are tools of mass murder on Tirpitz.

Anybody killed by Tirp torpedos need to go back to WOT.

 

Because of hydrolack and worst AAA Bismarck will always have priority in any competitiv play. 

[ShinGetsu]

1 minute ago, veslingr said:

Anybody killed by Tirp torpedos need to go back to WOT.

 

Because of hydrolack and worst AAA Bismarck will always have priority in any competitiv play. 

In any competitive play, players uses Alabama, Amagi and North Carolina. Tirpitz and Bismarck with their unreliable guns aren't viable choices.

[RUSSIANBlAS]

If enough kids whine will WG give Tirp a 2.1 sigma?

 

That'll make things interesting... 

[veslingr]

54 minutes ago, ShinGetsu said:

In any competitive play, players uses Alabama, Amagi and North Carolina. Tirpitz and Bismarck with their unreliable guns aren't viable choices.

NC/Alabama and Bismarck.....nothing else

[AnotherDuck]

2 hours ago, ShinGetsu said:

In any competitive play, players uses Alabama, Amagi and North Carolina. Tirpitz and Bismarck with their unreliable guns aren't viable choices.

 

Well, I've seen them used successfully, but that's for unusual strategies outside the regular competitive meta.

[Affeks]

Tirp along with Germans ships are random game ships, not competitive and ships with relatively low skill ceiling yet easy to master. THey are perfect as they are now

[RUSSIANBlAS]

3 minutes ago, Affeks said:

Tirp along with Germans ships are random game ships, not competitive and ships with relatively low skill ceiling yet easy to master. THey are perfect as they are now

 

Yes, I grinded out my Bismarck Captain to 19 points and Gnesi/Stealth Tirp to 18 points but I never play them now unless to farm Elite XP on the 19 point one. 

 

German BB get boring after awhile as their derpy guns and automatic lol secondaries mean most games are just down to good positioning.

[AnotherDuck]

15 hours ago, Affeks said:

Tirp along with Germans ships are random game ships, not competitive and ships with relatively low skill ceiling yet easy to master. THey are perfect as they are now

 

I wouldn't say they're easy to master, considering that their best distance is rather close for BBs, which means you have to know when to push, how hard, and when to pull back. It's not like all other BBs who can just snipe all matches, usually bow in, with far better accuracy. If anything, they're harder to master than other BBs.

[ShinGetsu]

8 hours ago, AnotherDuck said:

 

I wouldn't say they're easy to master, considering that their best distance is rather close for BBs, which means you have to know when to push, how hard, and when to pull back. It's not like all other BBs who can just snipe all matches, usually bow in, with far better accuracy. If anything, they're harder to master than other BBs.

I disagree. They have extremely limited potential compared to any other BB.

I think you're mixing "hard to master" and "having potential" there. Yeah, you need to know where and when to push. But that also applies to any other BB, and those "other BB" still can uses their other offensive tools no matter the range.

Tirpitz is stupid to play, of all things. Even when rolling your face on the keyboard you can still score more than 80k damage. It's great for pushing once in the game. But that's it : once. While a NC can do a complete massacre, and finish the game having brawled, sniped, tanked, caped and even destroyed some planes.

 

German BB may be "hard to master" yet they are clearly weaker than the others, as they have a very rigid playstyle and can't adapt well.

 

If anything I find pounding 30k salvoes on my Montana and seeing I have actual WEIGHT in the game is far more satisfying than a brainless (though well timed) rush in Tirpitz that may result in 100k, but wasn't challenging at all. And frustrating guns are frustrating. When you got a taste of Yamato 460 and Montana 12x406 with impressive accuracy you just can't go back to german shotguns.

[RUSSIANBlAS]

25 minutes ago, ShinGetsu said:

 

 

If anything I find pouding 30k salvoes on my Montana and seeing I have actual WEIGHT in the game is far more satisfying than a brainless (though well timed) rush in Tirpitz that may result in 100k, but wasn't challenging at all. And frustrating guns are frustrating. When you got a taste of Yamato 460 and Montana 12x406 with impressive accuracy you just can't go back to german shotguns.

 

Whatever else, this is true.

 

Accurate BBs are a pleasure to play, Yam, higher tier USN, Warspite, Nikolai. The GK is acceptable but only because you've got 12 rolls of the dice, although I actually have a thing for the FdG which I cannot understand. 

[AnotherDuck]

11 minutes ago, ShinGetsu said:

I disagree.

 

What I read from what you say is that you haven't mastered the German BBs, while you find the other BBs easy to master. I'm pretty sure I can accomplish some rather interesting things in Bismarck that I can't in Amagi, although I'm not that good of a player (somewhat above average, I'd say) that I can accurately judge where the ceilings are. Overall, I just find Amagi the easier of those two to do well in, but I still have better great games in Bismarck, even if they're less frequent.

[ShinGetsu]

I find Tirpitz both very annoying and very easy to score with, so I don't even bother trying to get better with it. I just faceroll, get 100k, sink, be done with it. Tadah♫ +350k credits. Next.

I'm just not even trying to like it. USN and IJN are just so much more enjoyable. I think I'll buy the Kii when it comes lives and I'll probably have faaar more fun with a premium Amagi that can launch torps than with a boring and easy Tirpitz.

 

Maybe I didn't "master" Tirpitz at all, but what I do with it works, why bother ?

 

Most of the unicum I play with agree with me on that point too. German BB are very limited. It's easy to get decent results with them, you can even makes them works quite well, but they have quite the low skill ceiling. At least compared to NC and Amagi for Tirpitz, and GK to Yamato and Montana.