Jump to content

_RC1138

Banned
  • Content Сount

    8,864
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan

    [5BS]

Community Reputation

4,167 Superb

3 Followers

About _RC1138

  • Rank
    Vice Admiral
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

4,118 profile views
  1. _RC1138

    STOP MESSING UP AXIS SHIPS WG!!

    First of all, if we're ranking engineering practices in the era of 1895 to ~1925-30, americans are close to the bottom as well, and prior to that, in 1820 to 1880-1895, they were worse than the Japanese. Americans were *awful* at nautical engineering in that era, as they still had too much anti-British sentiments, and the vast, vast, VAST majority of major nautical engineering advancements were coming out of the UK and the americans were slow to adopt it. The Japanese of this era only exceeded that of americans because they sent so many of their engineers to train in the UK (much like how Imperial Russia under Peter the Great did the same; nearly all nautical engineering traditions hold their roots in the UK; the only alternative of quality is Italian and they have VERY different design philosophies). In the subsequent, interwar years, the american obsession with standardization left them largely in the dust, with compromised designs, and likewise their [edited] attitudes towards carriers left them WAY behind the 8-Ball come 1940 where Carriers (after Taranto) came to become seen as a true major power player; the British had adopted the Carrier concept way earlier than that, conducting Carrier operations during WWI itself, and the Japanese adopting it shortly thereafter. It's no coincidence that basically the worst design carriers of the WWII era are all american (Yorktowns/Wasp/Ranger; Lexingtons only get a pass because of their size which was a function of being CC's first, not CV's) and that their calvalier, almost soviet attitude towards human life had them as too-late adopters to Armoured decks, leaving their ships morgues when attacked (as opposed to British, and even later Japanese, carriers where massive damage resulted in paltry few, if any, casualties). Second of all, the only reason the Japanese had any competent warships between 1895 and 1945 is that they bought, borrowed, and stole British warships/warship designs. It's again no coincidence that there is VERY little difference between the Yamatos, Nagatos, and Fusos (on a fundamental engineering level: their framing, compartmentalization, keel design, tank design, handling characteristics, initial stability, ect are VERY similar ship to ship, much more similar than say, the KGV class to the QE to the Nelsons to the 2nd KGV's; British engineering evolved over this era, the Japanese did not since they were just copies of copies), given that each one is progressively just a copy and enlarged version of the previous version, with the Fusos being British designs. Likewise for their Battlecruisers, the Kongos were straight up purchased and copied from British design. And their Pre-Dreadnoughts were almost exclusively British designs/purchases. But this near total lack of home development left the Japanese *WOEFULLY* behind in technological understanding, with vital aspects of nautical engineering wholely unknown to them; this was always a problem but REALLY caught up with them in 1930's and 40's. This is most exemplified by the near total ignorance to the Free Surface effect. I've read LARGE number of textbooks and papers from Japan of this era and they appear to be 100% ignorant that it exists and the dangers it poses. The reason they were able to get away with it prior to ~1920 was that they were LATE adopters to Oil-Fire ships, and *coal* fire ships, obviously, are essentially immune to Free Surface effect (baring flooding, which fyi is why Japanese ships that received even minor amounts of flooding almost always were lost at sea and/or capsized at some point). But as they started to adopted fuel oil across their navy, they started running into MAJOR issues, with several major events in the lead up to WWII highlighting the sheer incompetence of their nautical engineering community. These defects were NEVER properly addressed as it took well into the late 40's for elements of the free surface effect to be adopted and understood within their larger ship building industry (Japanese cultural issues of the era, being very conservative (in the literal, not political, sense of the word) slowed the transposing of these skills/information even though some aspects of Japanese academia were catching up in the early 40's). Third, and most importantly, I am not american, I'm British, specifically English, and do not hold their engineering abilities to anything but just sheer mass production and scale ability, and view their ships as, in almost all cases, nearly totally devoid of the finer forms of engineering, and instead opting purely for ease of manufacture and operation: they epitomize Jack of all trades, masters of none. More often than not, of this era and on to today, american engineering firms prefer to just buy their way out of problems, over-engineering tasks that could be more easily accomplished with perhaps more difficult and rigorous solutions, but cheaper and more effective overall. The Apocryphal 'space pen vs. pencil' is more true in spirit than I think it is often given credit.
  2. _RC1138

    This is Why We Complain about CVs

    So you don't actually have a well thought out response huh? Is it due to being incapable, of a tacit acknowledgement that there ISN'T really a defensible reason to comport oneself as such? The only saving grace is it seems wargaming is solidly on the counter side of this, and is doing nothing to reign in things to make it so you can print krakens at T2-T6. Enjoy your double CV matches as they don't seem to be going anywhere soon.
  3. _RC1138

    STOP MESSING UP AXIS SHIPS WG!!

    Well in no category would I put an IJN or KM Ship as 'worst' at tier. Typically that's an american or French or Pan Asian or Russian (ironically) ship. So to you, you cannot tolerate being average. Ergo, best>>>>everything else crap. That is what you are saying, so maybe you need to reevaluate your own sentiments. They also recruited them for MK Ultra for mind control and non-consensual medical experiments, often times against minorities. Nazis do what Nazis do. And bear in mind that *other* space programs have accomplished the same without resorting to you know, Nazis. Again, it shouldn't be controversial and I am 100% comfortable saying that Nazis should, from N to i, be shot, hung, and buried alive whenever possible. Maybe *your* country is okay with them, but mine generally has not been since we didn't wait for half the war to deal with them. It has the biggest of the tree ships, and still larger than the American (plus Arizona), French (both tree and Dunqu) Japanese Tree (Fuso), parity with RN QE and Premium Warspite, larger than the Russian Izmail. Only the WV and Mutsu outgun her, and at that tier not in a meaningful way, given that the important threshold is 15" to overmatch the 25mm bows. Just drop this one like it's hot because it makes LITERALLY no sense and no one would agree with you that *Bayern* is an oversized cruiser. You can make the argument for Gnies, maybe. You can surely make the argument for PEF as it IS a CC, but Bayern is *solidly* one of the most Battleship, Battleships of T6.
  4. _RC1138

    STOP MESSING UP AXIS SHIPS WG!!

    I like the Tirpitz, but I would never self describe as a wehrboo.
  5. _RC1138

    STOP MESSING UP AXIS SHIPS WG!!

    And I agree, but that isn't a tiering issue, and to be fair, KMS DD's have been a problem since the day they were released. They need 1/4 pen on their guns and heals across board, but beyond that they are actually decent in most cases. The L.M. is one of my favorite T7 DD's hands down. And their T2 and T3 are often considered to be the strongest DD's at their tier.
  6. _RC1138

    STOP MESSING UP AXIS SHIPS WG!!

    And is there ANYTHING wrong with any particular IJN/KM/Italian ship based on *tier* placement? Besides the *obvious* issues like Musashi should be at T10 and GC at T6? How on earth is *Bayern* an obese cruiser? It has the biggest guns (among tree ships), best armour (truly impossible to citadel at it's tier against all but *1* T6 BB), decent secondaries, and sure it's fast, but not the fastest.
  7. _RC1138

    STOP MESSING UP AXIS SHIPS WG!!

    What part is a delusion? The GC and KA are in fact banned from sale due to being overpowered, with the GC being so bad they actually TRIED to retier her only to stop due to MASSIVE overblown backlash from the whinier parts of the community. Derpitz IS in fact a straight upgrade over the Bismarck; don't trot out the 'muh AA' defense: it's [edited] and the difference is minor enough to not be worthy of mentioning. Scharnhorst is CONSISTENTLY the most played T7 Premium BB, by like a huge margin and THAT IS a serious thing since that is one of the heaviest tiers with BB's. Not much delusion there, just things that hurt your preconceived notions.
  8. _RC1138

    STOP MESSING UP AXIS SHIPS WG!!

    So then think about it though: you are talking about just MAKING crapup to make them better: they ALREADY DO THAT, just for the Russians/Soviets, and how well does that blow over? You want them to start adding fever dream Nazi/IJN boats? We need ANOTHER set of [edited] impossible builds? And the KM's aren't even brawlers anymore. For one their Cruisers *were ALWAYS* snipers: they have the longest range typically, insane HE performance, and great arcs. And their BB's just were buffed to have the same accuracy as USN and IJN and British BB's, so there's no more excuses: they can snipe with the best of them.
  9. _RC1138

    STOP MESSING UP AXIS SHIPS WG!!

    This is easily the dumbest excuse trotted out by contrarians in any context; 'Buh- buh- buh 'x-ship' has worse AA!' In everything that matters to a Battleship in the way WoWs actually works, the Tirpitz is a straight upgrade over Bismarck, made so by the [edited] decision by Wargaming to give her the SAME secondary performance for NO reason (she *had* a melee weapon system, she didn't need *two*). Here performance enhancers are *directly* tied to her optimized role.
  10. _RC1138

    STOP MESSING UP AXIS SHIPS WG!!

    Huh? They get 15" Guns earlier than other nations (T6 Bayern; vs. USN, MN, IJN, and even *Russian* all have 14" guns; only the RN with Queen Liz has 15" guns: an important note as that means that Bayern can semi-uniquely overmatch all the other BB's at her tier (and above) but not in return. Their premium T6, PEF, is at parity with 14" guns and unparalleled speed. They get torpedoes, uniquely, at T7, on not just their tree but their premium as well. At T8 the Bismarck has maybe 'lack' luster guns, although that was true when it came out, now, less so. It is important to note that while we tend to think of T8 as 16" guns, it's really *JUST* the USN, IJN, and Russians that get that; the rest, RN, French, Italian (premium at the moment), get 15" guns, so she's really just one of the crowed, not uniquely undergunned. And at T9 and 10 they buck the trend with some of the larger guns available. So I'm not sure what on earth you are talking about.
  11. _RC1138

    STOP MESSING UP AXIS SHIPS WG!!

    She is *still* the go to T7 BB. And as I said, at T7, that's quite a claim since it is just JAM PACKED with BB's (I think only T8 has more and just barely). So you rate things on a scale of Best>>> everything else is crap. Got it. I can *promise* you wargaming will never listen to a word you say because you are unpleaseable. The two are *inescapably* linked. Just like, and understand I'm not just British, but English, liking Victorian Style... anything is likewise *inescapably* linked to British turn-of-the-century Imperialism. You cannot have one without the other. My favorite poem is 'If-' but I fully admit that it comes with some *nasty* issues given the author. You cannot have one without the other.
  12. _RC1138

    STOP MESSING UP AXIS SHIPS WG!!

    Am I the only one that remembers that they just got a MASSIVE buff to their accuracy that basically just makes them better versions of american BB's? They have better armour, better AA in some cases, sonar, secondaries, impossible to reliably hit citadels, and sure, less stealth, but it's a friggen BB, not a cruiser, and they can mount the accuracy mod at all tiers, not just 9 and 10 like the USN.
  13. _RC1138

    STOP MESSING UP AXIS SHIPS WG!!

    See my edit above. You also conveniently ignored Musashi, literally a buffed, downtiered T10 (oh boo hoo, it has worse AA: it's guns are, from a PRACTICAL standpoint, better, and allows a team to have an extra T10 where a T9 should be). Also, what the HELL do you expect them to do with the IJN and KM? The Japanese were easily the worst nautical engineers in the world of this era, and the Germans only slightly ahead. You can only polish turds so much. I mean the B65's are some of the *dumbest* designed ships I've ever seen; they would be lucky if they didn't crack in half turning at a speed greater than 12 knots and likely would flip over in a stiff breeze like the Vasa, and the Japanese *couldn't* make guns of that performance level. Nor could they account for the Free Surface effect, and such a large cruiser would run into some serious problems as its tanks emptied. After about halfway run time, they'd likely flip over from a propagating wave. The Japanese were the *WORST* nautical engineers in the world and the B65 is their magnum opus of incompetence. I've been at conventions where fellow Nautical engineers have LAUGHED whenever the name 'B65' is brought up (along with many other Japanese ships, with a cavalcade of 'what were they thinking?' following.
  14. _RC1138

    When they change the IFHE...

    Better question is if there are going to be any case-by-case buffs to certain ships that will see a pretty decent chunk of their DPS hacked off. Atlanta, Dallas, Helena/Boise/Nueve, and Abruzzi were already at meh level, now they will be seeing some major issues against BB's. Maybe they should just remove their citadels, particularly Atlanta who might as well just be a crappier DD under the change as her survivability is basically null.
  15. Actually I thought about it; it should actually be much higher the times; if 10 shells worth of damage take to kill, and you have 50% accuracy, then 20 shells are fired, and if of those 20 hits, only 50% do damage, it's really 40, not 30. So really those times should be higher: Bismarck takes 380 Shells Fired to kill from full health Amagi takes 364 Shells Fired to kill from full health North Carolina 360 Shells Fired to kill from full health Lion 372 Shells Fired to kill from full health Musashi 532 Shells Fired to kill from full health Now let's again assume 'the worst' for the BB and take the fasted *RPM* ship, not necessarily the fastest reload, which works out to be Belfast with a 7.5 second reload on 12 barrels, which works out to 96 RPM. Bismarck takes 4 Minutes almost exactly to kill Amagi takes 3.8 minutes to kill North Carolina 3.75 minutes to kill Lion 3.875 minutes to kill Musash 5.5 minutes to kill So yeah, even WORSE in favor of the BB's for just CL Pen Damage, again assuming NO heals, no fires (which I'd be somewhat amenable to), and super high, unrealistically high, accuracy.
×