Jump to content

HMS_Formidable

Beta Testers
  • Content count

    1,350
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    4222
  • Clan

    [SCRAP]

Community Reputation

476 Excellent

About HMS_Formidable

  • Rank
    Lieutenant Junior Grade
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

4 Followers

Recent Profile Visitors

1,102 profile views
  1. UK carriers coming soon?

    drag into the grey line at the bottom of your 'reply' / 'post' panel.
  2. UK carriers coming soon?

    Follow the link on my sig to find out why...
  3. British CV's

    And we've also seen Ark Royal II (the one active during World War II) on WoWS promotional gumph.
  4. How effective were the japanese 25mm guns?

    For reliable (non-gamer) information, check out Norman Friedman's excellent Naval Anti-Aircraft Guns and Gunnery. You will see the gun itself was not great, but not quite complete crap. Their range issue was compounded by Japanese doctrine and AA directors. Specifically, the technology did not advance as much as the other nations did during the course of the war.
  5. RN CVs closer than we think?

    Posted on another thread, but meh... Here's my identifications: HMS Furious: She is identifiable by the modified bow section, with the 4in mount and raised bow plating to protect against incoming water. HMS Audacious: Clearly identifiable by the very large bridge and streamlined hull in comparison to other armoured carrier designs. HMS Implacable: Identifiable by the different arrangement of gun in front of the bridge, the curved bridge forestructure, and the deep sponson for the aft 4.5in gun mounts. HMS Indomitable: Her hull looks to be as high as the Implacable's (therefore two hangar decks - she'd be lower if she was Victorious, Formidable of Illustrious). her shallow aft-4.5in sponson is another give-away. HMS Hermes would have to be the lowest-tier RN carrier. She could carry about 15 aircraft in her hangar ... she was designated an "experimental" carrier as she was the first designed from the ground-up with a flight deck and island from the start. She was sunk without any aircraft onboard during "Britain's Midway", Operation C, the attack on Ceylon.
  6. Here's my identifications: HMS Furious: She is identifiable by the modified bow section, with the 4in mount and raised bow plating to protect against incoming water. HMS Audacious: Clearly identifiable by the very large bridge and streamlined hull in comparison to other armoured carrier designs. HMS Implacable: Identifiable by the different arrangement of gun in front of the bridge, the curved bridge forestructure, and the deep sponson for the aft 4.5in gun mounts. HMS Indomitable: Her hull looks to be as high as the Implacable's (therefore two hangar decks - she'd be lower if she was Victorious, Formidable of Illustrious). her shallow aft-4.5in sponson is another give-away. HMS Hermes would have to be the lowest-tier RN carrier. She could carry about 15 aircraft in her hangar ... she was designated an "experimental" carrier as she was the first designed from the ground-up with a flight deck and island from the start. She was sunk without any aircraft onboard during "Britain's Midway", Operation C, the attack on Ceylon .
  7. Royal Navy Carriers of the "Pinup" Video

    The Royal Navy believed heavily in the torpedo. Dive-bombing was not ignored (that was an RAF "thing"), but it was considered secondary to the torpedo. (See, for example, the 1930s Skua which sank the first warship in the war - Konigsberg. Barracuda was primarily a torpedo bomber, with dive-bomber as a secondary role. Same with Swordfish. Development priority was on SeaMosquito and Spearfish torpedo bombers) Therefore, I'm sure Wargaming will make the RN aircraft aerial leaflet droppers...
  8. Royal Navy Carriers of the "Pinup" Video

    I'd say the heavily-bladed plane would be the Hawker SeaFury (1946, navalised version of the Fury which was a lightweight version of the Hawker Tempest II). The carrier could be a poor rendering of HMS Formidable... one of the "Batch 1" armoured carriers (that radar mast alongside the tower is waaay too far over - the only one of the armoured carriers that had it intruding into the deck in even a remotely similar way, Formidable. Illustrious had a pole mast protruding onto the deck for its first six months of service, but again nowhere near that far inset. ). Though based on the 40mm mounts under the round-down of the main deck, that looks to be a very hypothetical modified version. But the distinctive 'pillbox' 4.5in mounts on the 'four quarters' does identify it as a remotely British design. (There were four types: Illustrious, Formidable, Victorious (Batch 1), Indomitable (Batch 2), Indefatigable, Implacable (Batch 3). The Audacious class was a follow-up armoured carrier design - but that screen capture looks nothing like it.)
  9. Debate: Which T6 cruiser is best?

    Personally, I'd Leander every time. She's everything I enjoy. Fast. Nimble. Her guns are nice. Her torps are a surprise. Sure she's made of tinfoil, but she can dodge. She's a cruiser-sized destroyer.
  10. Dido-Class Cruiser

    Don't forget HMS Aurora (Huang He) But, yes, with HMS Belfast removed from the premium shop there is a gaping hole in the RN lineup. Which isn't unusual given the insecurity usually shown towards those lines...
  11. Replacing Belfast

    Well... if they need modelling material for a Batch 1 1930s town class, the material is available. This book is extraordinary. Every page is another original constructors drawing, with notes! HMS Birmingham Tho I'd prefer batch 2: the turrets were protected.
  12. I WANT TO RAGE OUT AND QUIT TOO!!!!!

    Please, tell me where to find this manna from heaven!
  13. How it Works: Fires

    The problem of course is ... the suggested solutions to being 'burnt down' is creating the game's biggest problem at the moment: Waiting for 'noobs' to go ahead first and avoiding all potential 'hosepipe positions' usually results in that cluster of battleships we see most matches up the back of the map ... all jockeying to avoid getting shot at. Especially in the high tiers.
  14. How it Works: Fires

    All good points: - If every battleship captain starts with 19 points and has no cause to use points in non-tank areas. - If your opponent hasn't taken all the various fire-boosting bonuses... Rock.Paper. Scissors. It's just that, at the moment - as a player who regularly uses all three classes of ship - it seems to me the scissors are titanium and the paper is doused in gasoline... and the rock is lava. But I think one important aspect is being overlooked. It's easy to assume all the damage one receives under those several hosepipes of HE is fire based. It isn't. I think the introduction of Inertia Fused HE / Demolition Expert combination is what has tipped the balance in this game. This gives the flamethrowers the added strength of also being sandblasters. And the fallout isn't fun. Battleship drivers are (hatefully) hugging the back lines and hiding behind islands because they know if they get too close several invisible/island shielded cruiser hosepipes will open up on them. So by hiding the BBs are doing the right thing at one level - applying situational awareness. It's just that this isn't allowing them to do the other right thing - support the team in securing cap circles. And when they do the right thing, they can end up powerless in the face of the combined flamethrower-sandblasting delete effect - which isn't fun either.
  15. I WANT TO RAGE OUT AND QUIT TOO!!!!!

    THIS!!! Oh, so much this... I've started doing it myself lately. But I understand why. Battleships simply get sandblasted into the water with all that HE flying around. So they hide, hug the back lines and take pot shots where they can. It's not their fault really. It's the meta. I go out in my battleships, try to support the CLs - and get flamed down fast. So I go out in my DD and try to cap to keep the team happy ... and get radared to death. So I go out in my CL and wonder why I didn't do so in the first place - I get to blame everybody else!
×