lron_Dog_of_Jutland

Members
  • Content count

    325
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    62

Community Reputation

34 Neutral

About lron_Dog_of_Jutland

Recent Profile Visitors

162 profile views
  1. Karlsruhe / Coln all the way!!! ppl still say she's bad but she really isn't any more. She got the 1/4 HE rule so you don't need IFHE and the AP is devastating especially at close range. Plus she had good hydro - it is truckloads of fun to contest caps with hydro and AP against low tier DDs - just try to get an island between you and the enemy BBs or it can be a short ride :-)
  2. Hahahaha !!! A T2 ship killed the game - call the police!!! OMG this playerbase is degenerating so quickly - that's spooky!
  3. THIS! Yes just yes. Plus, not sure if WG read that memo but apparently Frankenstein ships stink.
  4. She could be testing the waters for an RN BC line.
  5. From the poll options? Clearly Ashitaka. But there are a lot other ships I'd like to see, SMS Derfflinger for example :-)
  6. No just no. No more Radar BBs please and for sure not Def AA BBs!!! Missouri is already bad enough don't push this any further
  7. This ship looks ugly. Another fictional WG ship. Meh.
  8. Ok thanks that's what I thought. So also late 1930s refits. You know, engineers during that era did all sorts of weird stuff to somehow have the FCS free of smoke but mostly it didn't work. Nagato's banana funnel is such an example - some effort spent but almost no benefit. Oil was better than coal though. But the only thing that really helped was choosing the right side in a battle as Hipper did against Beatty in the first phase at Jutland. While the smoke obscured Beatty's ships the wind blew Hipper's ships clear. But coming back to the modelling part - call them errors or not - what I would like to see changed: - Kaiser redone into some kind of Yavuz style limited refit (no new bow, no funnel caps, no stupid superstructure, light AA) - König remove the fake bow and the range finders on the turrets (plus a realistic 1918 Kronprinz as premium :-) ) - Bayern redone into some kind of first QE refit - Kii - agree with @Puxflacet that the torpedo launcher position is not ideal. Would prefer a Tirpitz style here. They should change this and ideally also replace the bow which looks more like Tirpitz. A Nagato-bow would be a better fit here as the original one is the same as on the stock Amagi but would likely be rebuilt the same way as Nagato. If they'd fix these four ships I would be happy.
  9. Well, we know that the German navy slapped funnel caps on everything later in the war (still without much success). Also I would like to note that these caps are a lot less extreme than WG's... Do you know when this refit was completed?
  10. Bayern's refit is less implausible than Kaiser's, I give you that (still less plausible than König's though). And you are right that a heavy Scharnhorst-style mast would've been even less plausible. However we need to consider the scenario/outside world constraints. Had the Badens survived and would have been taken over by the Reichsmarine, they would have formed the first line of defence against France in the West and Poland and the USSR in the east (likely split into two pairs, one in Kiel and one in Wilhelmshaven). Exactly what the Panzerschiffe were built for. So first conclusion would be that the Panzerschiffe would not get built. Second, this role and the fact that all German WW1 battleships were very small and had very limited space and deck space would dictate what kind of focus a refit would have. They would be up for modernization towards the late 1920s so let's look at the modernization elements you mentioned: 1. Propulsion and resulting funnel: considering the Badens only need to fight in the North Sea and Baltic, range isn't an issue. So no need for Diesels. Most likely the mixed boilers get replaced by more efficient oil fired boilers and the turbines by newer, more efficient ones. This will save about 2500t and give her some extra power for about 24kn. Again, the short hull isn't really good for more. Oil fired boilers take up less space so the funnel can also be different. And while you are right that a trunked funnel is likely it would certainly not be a copy of a ship almost twice the size! Most likely the funnel would have looked like the first two on Schleswig-Holstein or the trunked one of the 1920s QE refit. Certainly you want the funnel to be as far away from your FCS as possible - which is the second reason WG's model doesn't make sense. The funnel would rather be where the old aft one was. 2. Tubular foremast: you are right that these masts were popular German design practice in the 1920/30s. In depends on the extend of the refit (=political will to spend money on the navy) if a new mast gets installed or if the existing tripod mast gets augmented with platforms for AA, searchlights and FCS - like on the first QE refit and the Revenges. But either way - WG placed the mast so far back that it is obscured by exhaust gas from the funnel. So if they install a mast it would be further fore - right where the tripod was. The WG model looks like a recreation of the Orion Problem. 3. Secondary battery and AA: removing some casemated guns is possible but given the limited deck space and the fact that the German Navy didn't have DP guns they can't really be replaced by turrets. And as casemated guns are relatively light it is well possible they'd simply kept them. AA again is excessive as described above. AA wasn't high on the agenda until the war was already at full swing. 4. Cruiser bridge: well... could be but not very likely considering that all German battleships starting with the Bayerns (plus the BCs starting with the Derfflingers) including Bismarck, Scharnhorst and the H-Class had relatively similar superstructures - save the mast. Slapping all of a sudden a cruiser bridge on one is odd. More likely the superstructure would have been extended but mostly kept. Just take a Scharnhorst and a Bayern and remove masts, funnels, etc. and you'll see the continuation. 5. Bow: this one is surprisingly not that implausible. WG more or less took the L20a bow for the refit and considering the Badens could be wet at high speed (and we are adding 30-50% HP) a new bow makes some sense. Speed-wise that won't help much though. Considering the expenses the same constraints of money and political will apply. Long story short - WG slapped a lot of random WW2 elements on the ship - all they could think of. That's however not what happens in reality. Money is short, the navy might be politically unpopular after a disappointing performance in the last war and ships need to be fit for purpose. So not everything that could be done will be done. Personally I think a refit like the first Queen Elizabeth refit with the trunked funnel and augmented tripod would be the most likely/ plausible refit for the Badens.
  11. Not a fan of copy/paste premium ships either
  12. Ouch that is one ugly concept... and while having fast raiders is a good idea, picking the Kaisers is the worst possible solution (slow, small and fat). Modernizing the Battlecruisers and use them as raiders would be the way to go (first and foremost overcome the range problem as Germany would be lacking overseas bases - eg fit two Diesels on the inner shafts and install new turbines on the outers for sprints. This would however redistribute a lot of weight, can't do the math if it would work at the moment as I am on vacation :-) ) And then the Italians - well only thing they proved is that rebuilding a relatively obsolete design is a terrible way to waste large sums of money and ending up with nothing. The extensive refits didn't make these ships even a close match to a modern BB - not even on par with the QEs. To be fair - the Italians ONLY did that because they didn't have better candidates for refits. Germany did (or would have in this alternate history scenario where apparently all ships survived Scapa Flow).
  13. Again that was an explanation given by a WG employee not mine :-) Tbh I don't think there is a "historical" reason behind this decision but some kind of weird gameplay consideration. However I admit I also fail to see the reason and didn't notice the difference gameplay wise (played both ships but only kept the funny split beard). As for the refits it just triggers me a lot that the scenario behind the refits is inconsistent and the result bad looking. T4 wouldn't even need a fantasy refit and if they still really want to (comfort of living) a VERY limited refit would suffice. And while single elements of the current model are within the realm of possibilities the combination to a full refit as part of a what-if scenario is certainly not. Why? 1. nobody at his mind rebuilds a bow on a 22kn obsolete-Layout dreadnought that has proven to be see worthy enough to travel to South America. Look at the QEs - extensive refit but the bow is not rebuilt. Why? Because it is expensive and doesn't bring any benefit (apart from sea keeping which wasn't an issue to begin with). If the ship should go faster you'd lenghthen the stern instead. 2. Wackeltopf AA directors would be a 1940s thing and look clearly out of place on a more late 1920s / early 1930s refit (the game file specifies 1936 btw) still not the right time for Wackeltopfe (it would be an open mount by that time and the placement is at least questionable) 3. Funnelcaps only got added later as well and were mostly ineffective. Having a cap on the second funnel is particularly useless. 4. The heavy AA has bad firing sectors and if you look at how many (=few) AA guns the German ships carried at the beginning of the war an outfit like this is more a 1940s thing as well (the Panzerschiff Deutschland only carried 3 AA guns at the start of her career) These are just examples of some isolated elements but the real problem is the implausibility of the scenario. Keeping Kaisers, Königs, Badens and the Battlecruisers is already more than the 3 shares of tonnage Japan got for the WNT. For an alternative what-if scenario this tonnage is a reasonable assumption which is about 300k tons for battleships. Hence the only battleships worth keeping & modernizing would have been the Königs and Badens. And this isn't even considering dock space and shipyard capacity. A refit on König and Baden is ok'ish although Bayern looks horrible as well. I could live with a Yavuz or Schleswig-Holstein style refit on Kaiser but the rest is just [edited]. König I am kinda ok with apart from the bow and rangefinders on the turrets so this could be a quick fix. For Bayern's elite hull there is no hope other than the trashbin. Just start over please...
  14. 1. Don't have the quote handy but WG went like "balance - and if you need an explanation think of additional supplies carried by B-Marck for an Atlantic raid" - if I find the quote I'll add it 2. ok It is ok to disagree here. If these details bother you go ahead and ask gem to be fixed. I am not a big Kriegsmarine fan so these inaccuracies are not relevant to me. Having 3 ship classed in the way we see them in game bothers me on the other hand. 3. Your scenario about Germany loosing the war and ONLY keeping the Kaisers is pretty artificial. Especially if you consider that König and Bayern also got fictional refits. So the scenario clearly not "Germany only keeping the Kaisers" but "Germany keeping the Kaisers, Königs and Badens". And in this scenario there is no way Germany would have kept the obsolete Kaisers as I stated above. 4. even more. Looking at what elements German Engineers used to modernize Schleswig-Holstein, along with how new ships built during this era looked would've given WG enough food for thought on how to modernize the ships if they have to. But if I look at the result I am not impressed. 6. Focus on asking for a realistic König hull? All for it :-) I would even prefer a premium so she would get her historical camo
  15. Bismarck initially sat lower for balancing reasons. Not because of inaccuracy. The details you point out I can't judge on but seem minor to me compared to the bull crap WG did on Kaiser. The fantasy refit is just plain horrible and by no means consistent. The AA directors and funnel caps are more 1940s while the bow tried to be 1920/30s. The AA guns have horrible firing sectors and the superstructure looks like crap. And that is not to mention the fact that the Kaisers would have been scrapped or put into reserve after WW1 - no matter the outcome of the war and any naval treaties. The layout was outdated and the guns small. If allowed, Germany would have rebuilt the Königs and Badens plus the Battlecruisers. That said - if you still want to see a Kaiser Battleship in a WW2 setting it would have been the Yavuz style. Minimal upgrades to FCS, gun elevation and slap some autocannons on. Cheap and more than sufficient to rule the Baltic against an almost non-existent Soviet Navy including two tetribad Ganguts.