Jump to content

Big_Spud

Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

    5,033
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    6510
  • Clan

    [NSF]

Community Reputation

2,554 Superb

6 Followers

About Big_Spud

  • Rank
    Captain
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Interests
    Tonks, Botes and other machines of war.

Recent Profile Visitors

4,829 profile views
  1. Daily reminder that the current version of the ship is just a worse Kongo with better AA slapped at tier VI. Very little actual attention to balance detail was placed in this ship, and in effect it has essentially become a tier VI Kii.
  2. At least one of Kongos torpedo hits was abreast her machinery spaces by Mark 18-1 torpedos with a 270 kg Torpex warhead, the other being the port bow chain locker. This would be abreast of the deepest part of her side protection system, the torpedoes running at a depth of 8 feet. Apparently this flooded the entirety of the No. 6-8 boiler rooms (some of the largest compartments on the entire ship), and progressive flooding due to poor sea state and sustained high speeds exacerbated what was at first manageable damage, and caused a 15 (later 20) degree list. Combined with the increasing self-harm inflicted with her continued sailing battering her bulkheads to pieces, she eventually began a death roll, before the fore magazines exploded without warning. Most battleships ingame do not simply roll over and explode after two torpedo hits if they keep sailing forward. Kongos death was also assisted by the fact that she was the oldest capital ship in the fleet. Her subdivision was not up to par with newer vessels (also evidenced by the flooding of the Kirishima and Hiei), and her fewer large compartments were more vulnerable to the free-surface effect.
  3. Also worth noting that in the case of Dunkerques damage from 15" shellfire, the British 15"/42 is heads and shoulders above the Japanese 14"/45 in terms of not only raw penetrative power, but also post-penetration effect and deck penetration. Neither ship was designed with taking that sort of damage in mind, although the French ship probably has a better chance of actually surviving it in some circumstances.
  4. Suppose we could also potentially factor in the RPC for the Dunkerques. Even a non-satisfactory RPC is better than no RPC.
  5. Big_Spud

    Discussion of +1/-1MM

    I can tell you right now that it would be a hell of a lot less frustrating.
  6. Let me rephrase this then: Kongo has no immunity zone against the Dunkerques. Dunkerque and Kongo can both hurt each other at most ranges, although the French ship has improved protection from most approaches and angles. Strasbourg actually manages to have a decent immunity zone against the Japanese 14” gun firing the Type 91 shell, starting at 19 kilometers, and extending to around 30 kilometers. The French gun is much more powerful than the Japanese gun, and can penetrate any part of the Kongos vertical armor at any realistic range. This is assuming the lowest possible quality for the French armor. There is no indication that the Kongo has any real degree of superiority over the French ship, with the possible exception of the relatively large dispersion patterns of the quad turrets.
  7. The armor scheme of the Kongos even post refit, was largely inferior to that of the Dunkerques, particularly Strasbourg. The French ships have a thicker belt with a significant incline, combined with a more modern SPS. Dunkerque had a 9” (225 mm) belt sloped at 11 degrees from vertical. Strasbourg was significantly improved, with an 11” (283 mm) belt at the same slope. Behind this was a second 2” (50 mm) sloped deck. Barbettes were 12.1” (310 mm) on Dunkerque, and 13.5 “ (340 mm) on Strasbourg. Turret faces were 13” (330 mm) and 14.1” (360 mm) respectively. Machinery spaces had a 4.5” (115 mm) deck, with 5” (130 mm) over the magazines, in a single layer. Below that was an additional 1.6” (40 mm) splinter deck. The side protection system for the Dunkerques was in a league all of its own at the time, being 7 meters deep with alternating liquid and air loading (as well as a form of rubberized water excluding material to control flooding). This system was one of the best ever put on a ship, with a designed resistance equivalent to 150% of the Kongos claimed 200 kg resistance, capable of stopping a 300 kg charge. A modified version of this system would also be used on the Richelieus, and by all accounts it is a front runner among all modern battleships SPS. By almost every metric, the Dunkerques were heads and shoulders above the Kongos in terms of protection of vital areas. Neither was capable of resisting 16” shell fire, but the French ships are infinitely better equipped for dealing with heavy cruiser and small caliber Battleship weapons.
  8. The Kongo class as rebuilt, does not begin the approach the levels of protection afforded by proper fast battleships. Although a great deal of improvement was afforded to her protection during her mid-late 1930s construction, it did very little to correct the deficiency of her vertical (belt) armor scheme. Most of the increases in armor during this time was focused entirely on the horizontal (deck) armor in order to protect from plunging fire at longer ranges, as well as armor piercing bombs. While the decks were increased in thickness to between 3.2” (80 mm in several layers) over the machinery and 4.7” (120 mm in several layers) over the magazines, the belt remained the as-built thickness of 7.9” (199 mm VC on 50 mm of Teak backing and a 16 mm NS holding plate). The belt itself was too narrow to entirely protect the machinery spaces, and the upper 5.9” (149 mm + 50 mm Teak and either 16 mm NS or 2x 12 mm NS) belts covering the upper side and casemates were merely intended to afford as much armored freeboard as possible against high explosive fire, and activate older shells which would explode before getting too deep, not reject any sort of Battleship caliber shells. This is also why a sloped internal deck was included, although it too proved incapable of really standing up to any modern shells. Indeed, this armor scheme was incapable of stopping even 8” shells from relatively intermediate ranges (below around 14 kilometers or so). The shallowness of the main belt also meant that shells which struck close to the ship could easily pass beneath it and enter the machinery and magazine spaces. The story with the barbettes and turrets is not much better. Some improvement in protection was made (some sources indicate 254 mm barbettes being increased to 305 mm with appliqué armor), but that was essentially it. Although her side protection system was strengthened by bulging and the addition of a torpedo bulkhead, it remained ineffective for its deceptively deep appearance. In reality, the system only has three layers, and with a claimed design resistance of 200 kilograms TNT (taken with a grain of salt, given the performance of other Japanese SPS) is incapable of effectively dealing with the damage incurred by most modern torpedoes. This is a problem exacerbated by her older construction, which has a smaller number of large compartments (especially above the waterline, where some larger areas run unobstructed from one side of the ship to the other), and less advanced watertight subdivision than what is seen in later Japanese designs. Although gunfire from Washingtons 16” rifles was what doomed Kirishima, it by no means demonstrates that it required 16” guns to perform the act. Any deep penetrating modern Battleship shell could have caused the same catastrophic damage, be it 12” or 18”. Her internals were utterly obliterated, and the flooding from subsurface penetrations combined with her large compartments (and the fact that shrapnel from the shells bursting could easily pierce the internal ‘armor’) meant that she was doomed from the moment the hits below the water started coming. Her damage control teams only stretched her suffering out with their counterflooding, until the point that her stability was so precarious that a slight shift in the distribution of water caused her to suddenly capsize. The Japanese classifications for the period had almost entirely abandoned the usage of the word ‘battlecruiser’, and most of the new speedy designs of the early to mid 1920s were classified simply as fast battleships. To my knowledge, this includes the Tosas, the Kiis, the Amagis. . . The fact of the matter is that the Kongos never ceased being battlecruisers in reality. Calling a Battlecruiser a fast Battleship, does not a fast Battleship make.
  9. Okay Colorados buff has me rolling, because all they did was add back the .1 sigma that they took away when they gave her better base HP a little while ago.
  10. Big_Spud

    MM vs 99.7% Loss Probability

    This is the kind of thing that saps a persons will to play the game.
  11. Big_Spud

    MM vs 99.7% Loss Probability

    You need to actually have the chance to make a comeback. This opportunity does not exist within the current trend of “the match ends in five minutes because six of your ships on the other flank died without doing anything, and the enemy won on points.” Beating the odds is the exception, not the rule. Ten [edited] losses for one win doesn’t inspire confidence. I’ll be as defeatist as I please, as things are only getting worse, not better.
  12. Big_Spud

    How to make Mouse a grouch...

    I’ll kindly decline, thank you. Good players don’t intentionally make themselves suffer when they don’t have to.
  13. Big_Spud

    This is not fun anymore

    The game is a mess content-wise, the playerbase overall is extremely low-skill at all tiers, and the client itself has been unstable since before release. Let’s not talk about the borderline broken UI even when in port. Yes, my computer with it’s 4.5 ghz processor paired with 16 GB of RAM, a GTX 1070, a good motherboard, and the game mounted on an SSD, really needs to freeze for ten seconds whenever I put a flag on a ship that looks like it was modeled in 2006.
  14. Big_Spud

    Prinz Eitel Friedrich is utter garbage

    Apart from the utter absence of any real tanking ability, lacking sloped internal decks to protect the citadel, lacking the overmatch capability of Bayern, and having a focus on anti-aircraft guns. . .
  15. Big_Spud

    Prinz Eitel Friedrich is utter garbage

    It doesn't play like a German ship. . .
×