Jump to content


After 10 games a quick micro review: HMS Hood


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

Jakajan #1 Posted 19 May 2017 - 10:19 AM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 890
  • Member since:
    09-26-2015

I've only played about ten games in the Hood so take this with a grain of salt but here are my initial impressions.

 

The Hood does not lack In terms of firepower. Her 15 inch British guns get the job done. They can citadel cruisers well and score high damage hits on battleships, while citadels against broadside battleships are rare, it is possible to see her guns strike a broadside battleship for 17-22k damage on a good hit. I will say her firepower feels stronger than Scharnhorst to me, but perhaps slightly lighter than Nagato.

 

Her hull is long and impressive, with thick armor and to be honest I feel like she has a tier 8 battleship durability, up there with North Carolina and superior to Amagi in terms of durability. It feels like she can soak almost absurd amounts of firepower, allowing her to survive long enough to use her guns to great effectiveness.

 

In terms of maneuverability the Hood is a mixed bag, the rudder is very responsive to quick turns, but the hull being as long as it is seems to take a while to get a full longer motion in. To be honest I like this because she feels nimble yet also lumbering if makes any sense.  Her rudder shift can be lowered to 10.7 seconds, while her turning radius is 910 meters.

 

Believe it or not the Hood can be actually decently concealed with a minimal concealment of 13.5km with concealment expert, I can and have blinked out many times to do quick repairs and stop fires from burning and the like.

 

In the end I would say Imagine if the Scharnhorst, Okhotnik, and Warspite all had a baby together that had no torpedoes, somehow you would get the Hood. The boat is long, fast, durable, with respectable but not incredible punch.

 

I think she is a bit over priced though I am enjoying my time with her. I think she is more my style than Scharnhorst in terms of T7 Battleships, and I like her more than that boat. No other BB has given me this same kind of feeling of being a magnificent, long battleship that Hood has. It's like Amagi length but 25% more so.


Edited by Jakajan, 19 May 2017 - 10:19 AM.


Taylor3006 #2 Posted 19 May 2017 - 10:28 AM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 1,146
  • Member since:
    07-10-2016
I have seen the Hood in about a half dozen matches so far. They were always burning from stem to stern. I would guess some fire protection would be in order.

Jakajan #3 Posted 19 May 2017 - 10:42 AM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 890
  • Member since:
    09-26-2015

Well, I use the Hood as a mid to long range battleship sniper. Her ideal engagement range is somewhere around 12km away from most fleet assets with her push range being to about 8km, idealy outside of Tirptiz and Scharnhorst torpedo range.


That said if nothing has torps I have closed to 4km before and got about 40 secondary hits, was pretty fun when it happened.



Monty9185 #4 Posted 19 May 2017 - 10:42 AM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 90
  • Member since:
    10-04-2015

View PostTaylor3006, on 19 May 2017 - 10:28 AM, said:

I have seen the Hood in about a half dozen matches so far. They were always burning from stem to stern. I would guess some fire protection would be in order.

 

Though that could be due to 'new ship syndrome' with everyone and their mother wanting to sink her (Hood), would make sense to spam HE at the ship too considering she is well protected. I see similar behaviour when in my North Carolina, death by HE spamming cruisers.



Jakajan #5 Posted 19 May 2017 - 11:05 AM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 890
  • Member since:
    09-26-2015

Well, she is incredibly durable. I just lost a match by a hair where I got 120k damage and withstood about 100k damage with a repair party still unused.

 

Average runs are very profitable by the way with 375k or so credits being pretty normal for her.

 

By the way I have two type 10 camo for her. Which one is supposed to be the more rare of the two? I'm not sure.



RivertheRoyal #6 Posted 19 May 2017 - 11:20 AM

    Captain

  • Members

  • 4,680
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

View PostTaylor3006, on 19 May 2017 - 02:28 PM, said:

I have seen the Hood in about a half dozen matches so far. They were always burning from stem to stern. I would guess some fire protection would be in order.

 

Well, I've built mine for survivability so far, using my Warspite captain for the Hood. So, Fire Prevention is a part of the build, and it's very, very good on the Hood, since the two superstructure fire locations are unified. Given that the Hood is 50% superstructure, it's almost a must-have skill.   

Besides any issues with HE spam and fires however, the Hood is extremely tanky when angled. Even 406mm AP shells can be bounced, if you use the belt armor to bait shots. And against T7 ships and lower, she does just fine. Hell, she does pretty well against higher tier ships as well, since that tankiness is retained quite nicely. 

Really, the only big issue I've had with her are the guns. 

While certainly workable, there are times where they seem determined to troll me—though they're generally pretty reliable in outputting damage. I think the trick is to not go for the citadel of battleships. Instead, take the 10~20k in normal penetration damage with each salvo.

 

All in all, I like the Hood so far.

And she's going to be even better once my Internet stops lagging so terribly.

 

View PostJakajan, on 19 May 2017 - 03:05 PM, said:

Well, she is incredibly durable. I just lost a match by a hair where I got 120k damage and withstood about 100k damage with a repair party still unused.

 

Average runs are very profitable by the way with 375k or so credits being pretty normal for her.

 

By the way I have two type 10 camo for her. Which one is supposed to be the more rare of the two? I'm not sure.

 

This is the camo that comes standard with every other bundle of Hood. 

 

 

And this is the one exclusive to the most expensive bundle. It's the rarer one, or will be once the other Hood bundles start coming out. 

  

 

 

And then these are the two you can get from the "Hunt for Bismarck" campaign.

  



nina_blain_73 #7 Posted 19 May 2017 - 12:58 PM

    Chief Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 198
  • Member since:
    12-14-2014

I played it last night and this morning and must say I like it a lot moire than my warspite. I don't see a big problem with the guns as some reviews suggested. and as for tankiness yup! AA yup!

and yes it cits cruisers very nicely.

I have no regrets buying her and have already added her to my primary stable where i do believe she will remain.  :)

 


BATTLESHIP BABES

BB: Mikasa. Konig Albert, Kawachi, South Carolina, Wyoming, Imperator Nikolai, Myogi, Arizona, Texas,ARP Haruna, ARP, Hiei, ARP Kirishima, New York, Gneisnau, Warspite, New Mexico, Colorado, HOOD, Alabama, North Carolina, Tirpitz, Iowa, Missouri, Montana  CL: Diana, Emden, Caledon, Murmansk, Kuma, Nuremberg, KirovAdmiral Graf Spee, ARP Haguro,  ARP Myoko, Atlanta, Pensacola, Indianapolis    DD: Smith, Tachibana, Campbeltown, V-170, Minekaze, Kamikaze, Okhotnik, Gnevny,  Blyskawica, Gearing

 

 


Prushn #8 Posted 19 May 2017 - 03:29 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 630
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

I've actually had a fairly good game in the Hood but have not been able to repeat it so far.


 

Clan: [KRG] KRIEGSMASCHINE-Divisioned with JochenHeiden. Good times!

KAISER, SCHARNHORST, GNEISENAU, BISMARCK 

 


centarina #9 Posted 19 May 2017 - 06:15 PM

    Rear Admiral

  • Members

  • 7,094
  • Member since:
    08-15-2015
all the Hood that I've ran into has been pretty easy to kill.  even with t6 ships.     could be the taters though.  :D

IJN: Mikasa,  Ichizuchi, Fuso, Amagi, Katori, kuma, Zao, Tachibana, KamikazeR, Shinonome, Shiratsuyu, Akizuki, Yugumo PA Anshan  

             VFM: Aurora,Svietlana,  Murmansk, Budyonny, Chapayev, D.Donskoi, Ognevoi, Kiev, Udaloi,Grosovoi,  Khab  FRDougay T, Le Gal

USN:   New York, North Carolina,Phoenix,  Marblehead,  Indianapolis, Baltimore,  Farragut, Sims,Benson,Fletcher, Bogue    RN Leander, Edinburgh   

KM:  Konig Albert, Bayern, Graf Spee, Gneisenau, Bismarck, FDG, Emden, Karlsruhe  , Roon, Lib Maas         ARP:All

Notser Certified Potato


Prushn #10 Posted 19 May 2017 - 06:48 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 630
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012
to be honest, it's guns seem pretty good and get good damage. Where I see a problem is in it's turning radius, VERY wide. If you get in a jam, you are more than likely not going to get out in any decent shape.

 

Clan: [KRG] KRIEGSMASCHINE-Divisioned with JochenHeiden. Good times!

KAISER, SCHARNHORST, GNEISENAU, BISMARCK 

 


Jakajan #11 Posted 19 May 2017 - 10:57 PM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 890
  • Member since:
    09-26-2015
Yeah, just be careful with those long turns, try to avoid more than 35 degree angles.

Btw the slow acceleration gives her some amazing passive torpedo defense

stegocent #12 Posted 20 May 2017 - 05:31 AM

    Seaman

  • Beta Testers

  • 11
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostRivertheRoyal, on 19 May 2017 - 11:20 PM, said:

 

Well, I've built mine for survivability so far, using my Warspite captain for the Hood. So, Fire Prevention is a part of the build, and it's very, very good on the Hood, since the two superstructure fire locations are unified. Given that the Hood is 50% superstructure, it's almost a must-have skill.   

Besides any issues with HE spam and fires however, the Hood is extremely tanky when angled. Even 406mm AP shells can be bounced, if you use the belt armor to bait shots. And against T7 ships and lower, she does just fine. Hell, she does pretty well against higher tier ships as well, since that tankiness is retained quite nicely. 

Really, the only big issue I've had with her are the guns. 

While certainly workable, there are times where they seem determined to troll me—though they're generally pretty reliable in outputting damage. I think the trick is to not go for the citadel of battleships. Instead, take the 10~20k in normal penetration damage with each salvo.

 

All in all, I like the Hood so far.

And she's going to be even better once my Internet stops lagging so terribly.

 

 

This is the camo that comes standard with every other bundle of Hood. 

 

 

And this is the one exclusive to the most expensive bundle. It's the rarer one, or will be once the other Hood bundles start coming out. 

  

 

 

And then these are the two you can get from the "Hunt for Bismarck" campaign.

  

 

I was wondering if there was 4 potential camos for Hood, the event has not been overly clear. 

I have been looking for the answer to this question for a while now so thanks for posting this.

 



ReddNekk #13 Posted 20 May 2017 - 08:27 AM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 889
  • Member since:
    10-04-2015

View PostPrushn, on 19 May 2017 - 11:48 AM, said:

to be honest, it's guns seem pretty good and get good damage. Where I see a problem is in it's turning radius, VERY wide. If you get in a jam, you are more than likely not going to get out in any decent shape.

 

That's my only real gripe about her, the super wide turning. Her guns seem to be somewhat meh for a VII.

Hold my beer and watch this!
 

 

Jakajan #14 Posted 20 May 2017 - 08:48 AM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 890
  • Member since:
    09-26-2015

One thing I noticed is that because of her slow acceleration torpedoes rarely connect with the Hood. It makes her speed less consistant and more difficult to predict. One consistent thing I did notice is at full speed in a turn she drops down to pretty 24 knots give or take .2

 

Also my average silver earnings are better in Hood than Scharnhorst.



BullHalsey #15 Posted 20 May 2017 - 02:54 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 497
  • Member since:
    04-24-2013
My preliminary observation, from fighting against it with the Colorado and an 18pt commander, is that if Hood is reasonably well run, the Colorado has the short end of the stick.  The Hood, a 15" Battlecruiser, has every reasonable expectation of not only being able to stand up against the Colorado, a 16" super dreadnought Battleship, but of outlasting and defeating it in a 1 vs 1 engagement.  Not complaining as I don't particularly care, but thusfar it appears they made it too strong and that in game it is a very strong T7 BB and not the Battlecruiser that it in reality was (until it had to fight and was immediately detonated).


 


 

 

 

 


Helstrem #16 Posted 20 May 2017 - 05:28 PM

    Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Beta Testers

  • 272
  • Member since:
    05-18-2015

View PostBullHalsey, on 20 May 2017 - 08:54 AM, said:

My preliminary observation, from fighting against it with the Colorado and an 18pt commander, is that if Hood is reasonably well run, the Colorado has the short end of the stick.  The Hood, a 15" Battlecruiser, has every reasonable expectation of not only being able to stand up against the Colorado, a 16" super dreadnought Battleship, but of outlasting and defeating it in a 1 vs 1 engagement.  Not complaining as I don't particularly care, but thusfar it appears they made it too strong and that in game it is a very strong T7 BB and not the Battlecruiser that it in reality was (until it had to fight and was immediately detonated).

 

Because it isn't a battlecruiser.  It never was, other than in British nomenclature.  It is a fast battleship.  It has battleship armor, battleship guns.  Bismarck got pretty lucky taking Hood out the way she did.  Some of us have been pushing back against this notion that she should be incredible fragile since she was announced.  Still, due to Jutland, Denmark Straight and the British nomenclature the idea that she should pop like an overinflated balloon sticks.

 

Your 16" armed superdreadnought lost to a 15" armed fast battleship.



BullHalsey #17 Posted 20 May 2017 - 07:07 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 497
  • Member since:
    04-24-2013

View PostHelstrem, on 20 May 2017 - 12:28 PM, said:

 

Because it isn't a battlecruiser.  It never was, other than in British nomenclature.  It is a fast battleship.  It has battleship armor, battleship guns.  Bismarck got pretty lucky taking Hood out the way she did.  Some of us have been pushing back against this notion that she should be incredible fragile since she was announced.  Still, due to Jutland, Denmark Straight and the British nomenclature the idea that she should pop like an overinflated balloon sticks.

 

Your 16" armed superdreadnought lost to a 15" armed fast battleship.

 

Haven't been defeated by one myself as of yet, and part of the reasoning behind my observation can be seen in the hitpoint disparity alone; Hood gets 67.7K while Colorado makes do with 50.1K.  Then, you can look at the belt armor and see the historical max thickness was 305mm, like Fuso, yet in game it is 350mm, which is actually a touch heavier than Colorado's.  And the deck which was 76mm at it's thickest is now up to a max of 95mm in game.  This is of course comparing the real thing to their computer model, but there seems to be a trend there.  Colorado's max belt was 343mm, and is exactly so in game, and the deck 89mm, exactly same in game as well.

 

So, in game we now have a ship that has become more heavily armored, in fact, than Colorado...and also still manages it's high maximum speed, i.e. no loss due to what is a large increase in armor weight.  But, frankly, Colorado was never available in a bundle for $100 either, and I do not believe it is wrong to stop looking for answers right there.



 


 

 

 

 


Helstrem #18 Posted 20 May 2017 - 09:58 PM

    Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Beta Testers

  • 272
  • Member since:
    05-18-2015
Hood has a 305mm belt in WoWS.  Not sure where you're getting 350mm from.

RivertheRoyal #19 Posted 21 May 2017 - 09:12 AM

    Captain

  • Members

  • 4,680
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

View PostBullHalsey, on 20 May 2017 - 11:07 PM, said:

 

Haven't been defeated by one myself as of yet, and part of the reasoning behind my observation can be seen in the hitpoint disparity alone; Hood gets 67.7K while Colorado makes do with 50.1K.  Then, you can look at the belt armor and see the historical max thickness was 305mm, like Fuso, yet in game it is 350mm, which is actually a touch heavier than Colorado's.  And the deck which was 76mm at it's thickest is now up to a max of 95mm in game.  This is of course comparing the real thing to their computer model, but there seems to be a trend there.  Colorado's max belt was 343mm, and is exactly so in game, and the deck 89mm, exactly same in game as well.

 

So, in game we now have a ship that has become more heavily armored, in fact, than Colorado...and also still manages it's high maximum speed, i.e. no loss due to what is a large increase in armor weight.  But, frankly, Colorado was never available in a bundle for $100 either, and I do not believe it is wrong to stop looking for answers right there.

 

I don't know where you got your numbers from, but they're patently wrong. 

 

Here's the thickest part of the belt armor. 

 

And here's the deck armor, which is separated into 25 and 51mm sections. 



BullHalsey #20 Posted 23 May 2017 - 06:50 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 497
  • Member since:
    04-24-2013
My bad then for using wargaming.net wiki as a resource, because unless there's some wild way of interpreting what they have there (maybe adding up total armor layers?), that's what it says.  In game model certainly looks more clear.  In any case, never really intended to complain about it, may even get one depending upon what the final price is and if I feel like grinding another commander.  Been around long enough I think I am getting tired of having to do that.


 


 

 

 

 





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users