• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


Community Reputation

51 Good

About Phaere

  • Rank
    Master Chief Petty Officer
  • Birthday
  • Portal profile Phaere

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Portal profile Phaere

Recent Profile Visitors

119 profile views
  1. I would definitely like to see the West Virginia and/or Maryland as a hull upgrade to the Colorado or as a premium. Those 5" /38s, extra bulk, and newer superstructures just makes them look amazing. The modern tech installed on the standards made them go from ugly (imo) to quite beautiful ships. Sure there might be some balancing issues but we already got the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau which are honestly ridiculous and the upcoming King George V and Nelson which will further make the Colorado look like scrap in comparison. Giving her the Maryland or West Virginia hull would just put her back on par with stronger and stronger competition. And because I'm a sucker for 3-gun turrets I'd also like to see her:
  2. A modified april 1938 BB proposal would fit better as a Tier 10 than the BB-65-2 in my opinion. Better guns with the 9x 457mm /47 guns. Better armor with a 375mm belt sloped downwards @ 19 degrees, 533mm barbettes, 508mm turret faces, and 425mm bulkheads. The only thing that would need to be adjusted is the powerplant / speed. Since it's about the same size as the Iowa just throw in the Iowa's 200,000 SHP engines so it can go 30+ knots.
  3. I'm perfectly fine with the Monarch at Tier 8 as it's an early design study of the KGV and fits much better at the tier than the KGV does. Though I do not agree with replacing Nelson with KGV. I like KGV, I just like Nelson more. She's unique and got character (despite being a bit ugly). + she's on of the big 7 which should belong in the tech tree like the other Big 7's.
  4. I hope they keep Nelson at Tier 7 tech tree. It's pretty unique and I was gonna play through the RN BB line simply for that ship. Big 7 at Tier 7 Please. Not saying I dislike the KGV, it's a really cool ship too imo. I just want Nelson more than KGV. Phoenix's solution is also acceptable.
  5. There's nothing really scary with those 450mm guns except the muzzle velocity but it really doesn't amount to much. Shell weight is basically on par with other nations 18" gun designs (except the USN), but the armor penetration is simply terrible, In terms of belt penetration the French 15" gun is better at almost all ranges. Something really went wrong with the design of those shells. If you want a really scary 18" gun lets look at the USN 18" /47 gun with super heavy shells: 1746kg (400kg heavier), 732mps muzzle velocity, 16" of belt penetration @27900 meters.
  6. According to sea group the Tier X only has 11" of belt armor... L2 was designed with 15" of belt armor, even the G / K battlecruisers were designed with 12-14" of belt armor. So I have no Idea where WG is getting their sekrit documents for the Tier X.
  7. I don't know why WG is so afraid to nerf the Khab. Having 7% higher winrate than the Groz, Shima, and Gearing along with >50% more damage then them is simply not okay, it's a blatantly OP ship and needs to be put in line with the others. Get rid of the troll 50mm armor that lets it bounce cruiser and battleship shells and makes it quite resistant to the HE of other destroyers. Nerf the guns (and keep them nerfed) don't just nerf them and buff them right back up later like you did last patch. While the RoF is fine since it's historical, it's HE damage needs to be brought down. Replace the OF-46 shell with the OFU-46 shell which has a much smaller bursting charge and therefore lower HE damage (5.95lb compared to the 7.8lb on the current shell, for comparison the 5" /38 shell used on gearing has a 7.5lb bursting charge). With how big and heavy the ship is reduce the speed down to 40-41 knts and slow down it's acceleration and deceleration.
  8. The Tillman designs are quite honestly completely ridiculous and in no way viable to build. For a Tier 10 i'd rather see the April 1938 Iowa preliminary design: 9x 457mm /47(48) caliber guns in 3 turrets firing a 3800lb shell. 375mm belt angled at 19 degrees. 27.5 knts (can be buffed to 30 like montana). In all honesty the design is impossible as is, as its the same size as the Iowa. To fit those guns it would need to be bigger and have a greater displacement, but it's still much more practical then any Tillman design. On topic of standard battleships I would definitely like to see Nevada at Tier 5, New Mex with Idaho refit or Tennessee at Tier 6, with Colorado receiving either the West Virginia or Maryland refit at tier 7. Having the 5" /38 secondaries would really put that AA "national flavor" back into early USN battleships since AA pretty much got usurped by the german battleships until you finally get the NC at tier 8. Doesn't help that the "brawling" role WG originally designed the standards around also got usurped by the Germans and they don't have enough accuracy to effectively fight in mid-range so better secondaries would give them a bit more bite at the ranges you need to fight in. I'm a real fan of the standards, especially in looks after the 1940's refits. I'm not a major fan of how they are in game currently. The current game meta has just made them a bit meh compared to everything else.
  9. It doesn't help that Henri IV is using the shells from this gun: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNFR_94-50_m1902.php same 220kg weight and bad penetration, air drag, and krupp value indicative of a WWI / pre-WWI shell. This is supposed to be a hypothetical "modern" 240mm gun and French shells of the 1930's and early 40s were quite heavy, had very good ballistics, and were a very low-drag design. A ship shouldn't be balanced around captain skills and you shouldn't need IFHE to make the shells actually do something other than shatter.
  10. From the images from the daily bounce it shows no belt on the Henry IV, does it have a internal belt similar to the Iowa and some other USN ships? and If so how thick is the belt armor?
  11. The Des Moines' guns were simply not capable of any sort effective AA ability. They couldn't elevate the guns high enough, nor train / elevate the guns fast enough. Simply look at the mount and turret data of the 8" /55 Mk 16 and the 8" /55 Mk 71 to see why. http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_Main.php Technically speaking you could have sailors stand on the deck of a ship and fire rifles at aircraft, but doesn't mean it will have any sort of effect. There's not much pretending they simply were not capable AA guns. Many Japanese guns also supposedly had AA ability with their san-shiki beehive rounds. But they were a completely useless. They were terrible at AA duty for the same exact reason the Des Moines' guns; lack of elevation angle and training / elevation rate to properly track aircraft.
  12. The Henry IV is huge, holy crap. It's much bigger than I expected. Not quite Moskva size but still quite big.
  13. I don't believe it was that one, but it is quite close.
  14. I wish I could find that video of a NC being detonated by a single 5" HE shell hitting the side of the ship. It's not ranked or anything but definitely something that fits in this thread in my opinion.
  15. https://worldofwarships.asia/en/news/announcements/french-cruiser-incoming/