Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

3,911 Superb

About mofton

  • Rank
    Vice Admiral
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

5,713 profile views
  1. Couldn't you just press 'P' to turn off your secondaries if you didn't want to be detected by their gun bloom?
  2. It'll be bad, but only a bit worse than Kongo (similar armor profile but thinner bulkheads, 19mm also gets overmatched) a tier lower. I've never found driving her a death sentence compared against a 12x 14in ship, and in some ways that's nicer than taking one of the squishy all-19/26mm ships up against a Warspite or similar.
  3. Why are you quoting me to tell me Arizona would be a problem for overmatch when I already said she would?
  4. mofton

    A dedicated Battle Cruiser line

    Well, we finally agree! I know, hence I cited J3, G3 and K3.
  5. mofton

    A dedicated Battle Cruiser line

    Yes, so they just morph into 'flavored' fast battleships. The flavor may be slightly less armor and survivability tweaks in exchange for speed - which can still be done - and maybe firepower. The British J3, G3 and K2/K3 designs for instance don't trade a huge amount of potential compared to high tier fast battleships - you can call them fast battleships if you like. You can still tweak them into working. There's already a range of armor values for high tier battleships, with some being softer than others. There's still a spectrum with space. Repulse has just been added with a 15% engine boost, which is silly but I think unfortunately sparked by an arms race with the French - she'll do 36kt without flag. Other ways to put a speed flavor in might include better speed retention in turns - rather than dropping to 75% speed, drop to only 90% and your 32kt high tier 'battlecruiser' turns at 28.8kt vs. 21kt on a Yamato. You can say the high tiers aren't battlecruisers, which is fine, maybe they're not - but they can be part of a "battlecruiser" line, tying into their potentially more extreme lower tiered fellows with similar traits and providing a worthwhile bit of variety, just as many 'cruiser' lines morph from light to heavy.
  6. I think she actually looks ok overall. There's concern about the 16mm extremities - but hell, she's a T6 so she'll get the joy of seeing T8's with >380mm guns that overmatch even the normal 26mm plating at T6 anyway. Put her against a Warspite and they both merrily overmatch the other. There are some ships that would be pretty awful - Hyuga with 12-barrels of overmatch, good accuracy and MBRB would be... a problem, as would say a good shooting Arizona with 12 barrels of overmatch. On the plus side when angled her amidships is pretty AP resistant, and the side plating is very HE resistant too for a T6 battleship. My concerns would be how some factors play together: Sniper accuracy + long range (good) + slow shell flight times, weak AP pen and weak HE (bad) = yes you can theoretically get good dispersion, but against maneuvering or well armored targets, so what? Very easy to keep maneuvering and reduce the threat, or for most ships angle-against and hugely mitigate damage. Incredible speed and engine boost (good) + very slow 3'/s gun traverse (bad) = shoot, or maneuver. If you look at the stats from LWM reviews for say Georgia/Jean Bart then they can achieve rates of turn of 4.1-4.3'/s and I suspect Repulse may be in the same ballpark. However those two ships get 4'/s and 5'/s turret traverse, while Repulse has 3'/s - better than QE and the same as Warspite, but on a hull that maneuverable and dependent on maneuvering? Worrying. Incredible speed and engine boost (good) + abysmal AA (bad) = huzzah, I'm flanking the enemy - no wait, I'm getting smashed to bits for having the temerity to go anywhere by a carrier! Oh well, I'll just group up with my friends - oh well, they're 21kt battleships so now I have to troll around at half speed? I found that a problem with Normandie and Repulse looks bad there too. Good fast pushers like JB/Georgia have at least middling AA.
  7. mofton

    A dedicated Battle Cruiser line

    I don't really understand the argument about real ships being low tiers. We've already had entirely fantastical lines with the German and Russian carriers achieving 0% commissioned ships, the Dutch running out at T4 and the British heavy cruisers having only 33% commissioned ships, at T5 and T6. Whether or not ships were built is largely irrelevant. Similarly I think its pretty irrelevant that the battlecruiser concept morphed into the fast battleship concept - I would implement British/German battlecruisers as battleships for matchmaking and general mechanic purposes - we've already done that with Prinz Eitel, Repulse and to a lesser extent Hood. Having a line with some consistent high speed flavor and trade-offs in armor is pretty much fine, whether you call the high tiers battleships or battlecruisers - there are already lines that change considerably up tiers e.g. light-heavy cruisers, torpedo boats-destroyers and for the USN Standard to Fast battleships for instance. Des Moines is vastly better protected than Pensacola, a battlecruiser line G3 being better protected than a Renown is fairly reasonable. The problem to an extent is that for reasons unknown WG decided that France was 'the nation of Engine Boost' so with that their high tier battleships are fast, well armed and still well armored, however there is still design space for high tier fast battleships to follow on from battlecruisers.
  8. mofton

    British CV Bounces 16 inch AP shells?

    To be fair, Midway loses a couple of irrelevant mm of armor, but gains a much greater extent of deck armor than she historically had. In game she's armored end-to-end and side-to-side, but historically the armor didn't extend that far, being a bit more like the British in-game scheme. Same deal (likely) for Hakuryu as Taiho was only armored between the elevators and in game used to have full deck.
  9. mofton

    British CV Bounces 16 inch AP shells?

    Glorious was a conversion of a WWI ship and lacked the armored deck of her later sisters, using her as an example of deck armor not working is pretty dubious... The armor in game is correct, the 'deck' armor on battleships was not the uppermost deck on the outside, but internal, on top of the belt. The British armored 'deck' was on the outside, but the thickness was half that of the Iowa internal armor. Leaving aside that Glorious wasn't an armored deck carrier in the first place you're right that the deck was less useful against Kamikaze hits, which could still damage them, and which did sometimes skim off unarmored decks. The reasons for the Essex class being retained generally don't relate to the armored box. The Essex class were a generation larger, later design with war experience compared to the pre-war British designs. They were then operated by a navy with far greater resources post war. The surviving american pre war designs - Enterprise - were similarly scrapped, though Victorious lasting until 1968 was pretty credible.
  10. I guess if carrier players don't like the game now, what was their advice? Oh yeah, quit.
  11. mofton

    Plymouth Vs Minotaur

    Minotaur is more focused, powerful and in my view enjoyable. Plymouth has a smaller citadel and smoke+radar combo, while Minotaur has to choose smoke or radar. On the downsides for Plymouth she has less gun power, half the torpedoes, terrible firing angles on the guns, slow traverse, no appreciable AA, worse radar if Mino takes radar and is generally pretty poor.
  12. Nice, I hate the chore of grinding through the pointless low tiers so this is a bit of a skip. Well, until they announce that I could skip this by early access to T5 or T6 on quasi-launch anyway!
  13. mofton

    New German Destroyers Review

    Just play the French, actual survivability and significantly better AP pen if that floats your boat. I don't even think Z-31's very happy with her pen, you get to bully an Omaha every 10th game you're top-tier, but you still see plenty of 127-150mm belts at T7-T9. GJM's torps feel bad to me, the reload isn't great on the twins and a broadside of 6 is pretty paltry.
  14. mofton

    New German Destroyers Review

    Half of them don't have Defensive AA... They handle like tubs, no engine boost, huge size, terrible turning. The armor and HP are worthless and feel bad at best. Torpedo damage is mediocre and 'rather slow' is a huge understatement. They also suck on GJM in particular with a broadside of just 6. I don't know how you've managed to develop such an unenjoyable pair of ships in Z-31 and GJM but good job.
  15. mofton

    Hak and FDR banned from Clan

    1/3 down, 2/3 to go.