Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Royal Navy'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Update Notes
    • Public Test
    • Contests and Competitions
    • Events
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Contributor Corner
    • Support
  • Off Topic
    • Off-Topic
  • Historical Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
  • Player's Section
    • Team Play
    • Player Modifications
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Contest Entries
  • Contest Entries
  • New Captains
  • Guías y Estrategias
  • Árboles Tecnológicos
  • Fan Art and Community Creations
  • Community Created Events and Contests


  • World of Warships Event Calendar

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 26 results

  1. Introduction Icarus's Wings A fresh contender in a strong tier for gunboat DDs Icarus is a big step-up from its predecessor, Acasta; the question is if it's a big *enough* step given how strong tier 6 is for DDs, especially gunboat DDs. Tier 6 is, in my opinion, the single best, most-crowded tier for destroyers. There's fantastic differentiation and a lot of strong boats. If you can't find a DD at tier 6 that fits your style, you're just not a DD player. Icarus is a much more versatile boat than her predecessor. You retain the same artillery configuration, with stats remaining basically the same, with exception of gaining .5km of basically useless range given the punitive shell arcs of her guns. However, your torps, while still slow, gain an extra 1k of range while maintaining Acasta's concealment, making stealth torpedo attacks more viable from unfavorable angles (with Acasta, you could only stealthtorp approaching ships unless you used islands to ambush.) You also get 2x5 torps instead of 2x4 while maintaining the singlefire capability, and they do much more damage. Don't get me wrong; Icarus is still first and foremost a fleet support/cap control DD. However, the torp upgrade gives her some much-needed damage-dealing capability and versatility. Her artillery is still limited, but she gets a hit point boost, plus she has hydro. Being able to put a 10-torp spread across a whole smoke cloud to flush out or kill red DDs, having a middle-of-pack hp pool and the nimbleness to dodge some fire, and hydro to give early warning of torps makes her a stronger cap contester than Acasta. Little things, but she feels much more comfortable and less out-classed. Part of that is also being middle or top tier more often, so YMMV, she just feels much more competitive. She still struggles from the same meh gun traverse and dpm of Acasta, but the improvements elsewhere help her with her primary role. And her stealth, while not an improvement over Acasta, is still fairly decent; she can outspot what can outshoot her, and use her quick-reloading defensive smoke to break contact when needed. Is she a keeper for me? No. And that's not necessarily because I don't like her; she felt far more comfortable than Acasta. Tier 6 is just such a stacked deck for DDs, including DDs that do many of the same things Icarus does well. Comparisons with the stacked deck of tier 6 DDs: The obvious comparison for Icarus IMO is Farragut, one of my favorite boats of all time. Farragut's only a hair below Icarus in HP, is very nimble, and puts out a fearsome DPM in a knife fight; she can't stealthtorp in all situations, but her torps hit hard and fast and she's adept at using them on ships approaching obliquely and then running before being sighted. Icarus will see her first, but Farragut is much faster, especially with speed boost. I've often said Farragut is, tier-for-tier, the best cap control boat in the game; Icarus is built for that niche, and may be just as effective, but it's a toss-up and although I'm fond of calling Farragut a swiss-army-knife DD, Icarus has an advantage in open-water torp operations, although Farragut's speed can get her out of trouble quicker. They're both adept at DD hunting in their own ways. I'll call it even. T-61 has slightly better hydro than Icarus, and quick-reload 8km torps, but her guns are a tad weaker; slightly faster ROF, slightly lower traverse, lower damage. She's a very versatile boat, and her advantage in hp and better hydro with only marginally worse concealment makes it also a toss-up as far as cap control, with T-61's longer-range torps making her a much better torpboat. Admittedly, T-61 is almost hilariously OP in the right hands just because she has no real weaknesses, so this may be an unfair comparison. Gaede has much higher visibility; Icarus can see her early enough to run, but a well-played Gaede can bully an Icarus in a 1v1. With support, Icarus can focus on spotting and win. Gallant is a nice alternative for those who place a larger emphasis on torpedo capability; she gives up 2 tubes compared to Icarus but gains 1km of range, and Icarus is a much stronger cap contester. And even with Icarus's improved torpedoes, she can't compete with Hatsuharu or Fubuki as a torp platform, although she can murder them in a gunfight. She's far more versatile than Gnevny or Fushun. PROS: *Single-fire torps. Great for island ambushes of ships coming around a corner, strait/gap control, or torping smoke clouds when you're pretty sure a red DD is in there due to flexibility of torp spread design (can drop them all in a row or spread them out as you see fit. And having a decent window to stealthtorp gives her some teeth in the mid-game or standard battles, expanding her role beyond her core competency of DD hunting, fleet support, and cap control. *Good acceleration and handling: RN DDs don't get speed boost, but they accelerate quick and hold speed in a turn. These aren't huge advantages, but they help you knife-fight other DDs and still avoid torps, and help get you out of trouble. *Decent stealth: Same stealth as Acasta; you'll get outspotted by some tier 8 DDs since they can equip the concealment mod, but you're at least in the neighborhood of everything in tier 6 and 7. You can outspot everything that outguns you. And your smoke is great for breaking contact and vision control even though it sucks for offensive use. *Hydro: Like Icarus's smoke, her hydro is mostly defensive; very limited range limits its use offensively, but when used properly gives you plenty of early warning of torps and allows you to be very aggressive in a knife fight, bearing in mind your average HP and the fact that you're still outgunned by USN DDs. CONS: *Meh guns: the improved AP ricochet angles RN ships get hasnt been a huge factor for me so far, and the low effective range (due to firing arcs), meh traverse, meh reload speed, and meh DPM means you need to be cautious in engaging other gunboats as even a win can be pyrrhic in lost hp. *No speed boost: She's nimble, and her quick-reload smoke can help break contact, but if you overextend you're not going to find it easy to get back out. She's not a deep-penetration DD and you're going to struggle if you try to break through to go for the CV kill. Fight for caps, play aggressive, but stay in support range and know your exit strategies because breaking contact is difficult, especially if you have red ships nearby at multiple angles and cant use smoke to break LOS with all of them. TL;DR: Icarus is an ok boat but it's a crowded pack. . For a less experienced player, I think she's a great choice for a t6 gunboat; Farragut's skill floor is a bit higher. She's a well rounded boat; she's got a bit more versatility than Acasta which makes her a far better boat for randoms, and as the first boat to have hydro in the line she fits better in the niche WG expects RN DDs to operate in. She seems like a balanced addition; not overpowered, not underpowered, but capable of performing according to the skill of her driver. If I didn't own T-61, I might keep Icarus for a Farragut alternative; but as I already have Farragut, T-61, and Gallant as keepers, Icarus doesn't add anything new to my port. Still a worthy addition to the game. Other British DD reviews: Acasta Doing Business (My other reviews - British BBs: Conqueror/Lion Monarch KGV Queen Elizabeth French BBs: Overall Line Review German DDs: Flottentorpedoboot My Waifu)
  2. You guys can cry all you want about CV's... we're getting Ark Royal soon The biggest question is at what tier... T6 almost makes more sense than T8 for Ark Royal given what planes she carried (no Swordfish will = a major crapstorm) and her lighter hanger space compared to the other T8's (especially Kaga's almost 2.5 times sized wing).
  3. Ahhh man... what are you doing Wargaming... I was hoping for an RN Super cruiser, but I'll take any Royal Navy ship you throw at me... Any guesses? My money's on HMS Temeraire, the second Lion Class laid down, as the bow shape is more consistent with a Lion than a KGV (although it could in theory be the long awaited PoW's). The rudder is wrong though; Lions had a large single unbalanced skeg mounted rudder, and that looks to be a regular semi-balanced non-skeg rudder. Also the Stern clearly is a Transom so that pretty much makes it not a KGV class for sure. We already have Vanguard so it isn't that. And the proportions are way off to be a G3 or N3 (given the relative size of the AA guns visible).
  4. LittleWhiteMouse

    Premium Ship Review: HMS Nelson

    The following is a review of HMS Nelson, a ship kindly provided to me by Wargaming. This is the release version of the vessel and these stats are current as of August 14th, 2017. The Walking Dead. Quick Summary: A slow Royal Navy battleship with all of her guns mounted forward on her bow. Her repair party consumable can allow her to come back from the dead twice over. Cost: 375,000 free experience. Patch and Date Written: 0.6.9. August 10th through 14th, 2017 Closest in-Game Contemporary Imperator NIkolai I, Tier IV Russian Battleship Degree of Similarity: Clone / Sister-Ship / Related Class / Similar Role / Unique Whoa, no one panic! Nelson is not the second coming of the Nikolai. She simply shares a very similar gun layout and achieves a similar state of resilience (though admittedly through different means). They also share the affliction of having a very high citadel which means they both fold like a deck of cards if someone catches their side with battleship AP. Finally, like Nikolai, Nelson's big weak spot is her bow. While the Russian battleship really only has to worry about shells punching through the upper part of her snout, Nelson's entire bow can be easily overmatched by most of her contemporaries, but this is a common affliction to all tier VII Battleships. PROs Powerful Repair Party consumable, restoring up to 40% of the ship's hit points per charge. Good armour protection versus American AP Bombs. Good 1.9 sigma value which helps tighten up her dispersion. Flexible gun layout, able to switch fire from port to starboard very quickly. Short fuse timers on her AP shells, leading to less over penetrations. Ridiculous HE performance, with 101mm of penetration, high alpha strike and a 46% chance of starting fires per shell. CONs She feels blind with no consumables to aid with spotting (plane, radar, hydro) Citadel sits high over the waterline. Lackluster penetration values, comparable to HMS Warspite at tier VI. Slow turret traverse of 4.0º per second Anti-aircraft firepower is concentrated in short range (and excessively fragile) batteries. Nelson is slow with a maximum speed of 24 knots. Large surface detection range of 15.3km. HMS Nelson is the last of the so-called "Big Seven Battleships" to find their way into World of Warships. These were the battleships of the United States, Japan and Great Britain that were allowed to be armed with 16" guns under the Washington Naval Treaty after World War One to put an end to the naval arm's race. They consisted the Nagato-class, represented by Nagato and Mutsu, the Colorado-class of three ships, Colorado, Maryland and West Virginia and Nelson-class with Nelson and her sister ship, HMS Rodney. Of these seven vessels, the Nelson-class are certainly the standouts where design is concerned. There's no denying that their silhouette is very distinctive. When play-testing her, I received many comments about her looks (often derisive, but a few people had the right of it and called her 'awesome looking'). I can say that her play style is as distinctive as her appearance. Let's get into the hows and wherefores of their performance in game. Options Nelson has access to an improved version of the Repair Party consumable. This restores 1,188hp per second for 20 seconds, healing up to 40% of the ship's hit points per charge. However, this only comes with two charges as opposed to the usual three for battleships. Nelson queues damage in the similar manner as other Royal Navy battleships. She uses the same Damage Control Party of other Royal Navy Battleships (except Warspite) with a 15 second active period. Consumables: Damage Control Party Repair Party Module Upgrades: Four slots, standard Battleship options. Premium Camouflage: Type 10, tier VI+ standard. This provides 50% bonus experience gains, 3% reduction in surface detection and 4% reduction in enemy accuracy. For your upgrades, you'll be picking standard battleship options. In your first slot, take Main Armaments Modification 1. You're going to be tanking a lot with your bow and turrets, so your guns take a lot of abuse. In particular, her B turret gets disabled and destroyed frequently. In your second slot, Aiming Systems Modification 1 is your best choice. Nelson's horizontal dispersion is not as good as previous Royal Navy premium battleships, so the extra accuracy is sorely needed. Her anti-aircraft guns and secondaries are not worth upgrading. In your third slot, take Damage Control System Modification 1. This will boost your torpedo damage reduction up to 21%. And in your fourth slot, you have a choice. Steering Gears Modification 2 will reduce your rudder shift down to 11.9s. Alternatively, you can take Damage Control System Modification 2 to reduce fire and flooding damage if that's your preference. Special Upgrades The only special upgrade that has any sort of application on HMS Nelson is Damage Control Party Modification 1. When applied to HMS Nelson, this would increase the active period of her consumable from 15 seconds up to 21 seconds without affecting the reset timer. This competes with Main Armaments Modification 1 in HMS Nelson's first upgrade slot. Given the amount of abuse her main battery takes, this special upgrade isn't worth applying. Firepower Primary Battery: Nine 406mm rifles in 3x3 forward facing turrets in an A-B-C layout on the bow with B superfiring over A. Secondary Battery: Twelve 152mm rifles in 6x2 turrets and six 120mm rifles Nelson's approximate penetration values for her AP shells are 550mm at 5km, 450mm at 10km and 350mm at 15km. Like Dunkerque, Nelson is largely defined by the layout of her primary gun battery. She mounts all nine of her guns ahead of her superstructure. Veterans who have played Izumo and are concerned about her gun handling can rest easy -- Nelson's gunnery is very comfortable; more akin to the Soviet tier IV Battleship, Imperator Nikolai I than the tier IX Japanese vessel. Her A & B turrets have excellent fields of fire with a 300º and 322º firing arc respectively. C is more limited, but still easy to use. It can engage enemies 25º to 137º off its side for a total combined field of fire of 224º. In most engagements, you'll be primarily making use of A & B turret with C being used to take opportunistic shots where possible. Nelson's turret rotation may not be fast at 4º per second (45 seconds for a 180º rotation), but with these guns all being forward facing, it's very easy to shift fire left to right as needed. Overall, Nelson's gun placement makes gunnery enjoyable. Even firing over the shoulder isn't too difficult. Nelson's accuracy, however, is a bit of a mixed bag. Her shell groupings are rather tight with a 1.9 sigma value, however she does not have the vaunted Royal Navy battleship shell dispersion seen previously on HMS Warspite and HMS Hood. Her linear horizontal dispersion appears to be the same as USN Battleships. This is still better than French and German vessels, but it's hardly enviable. As a result, when firing Nelson's guns, you can be blessed by a string of really tight shell groupings and then suffer some really wonky strays. Nelson's AP shells aren't terribly inspiring but her HE shells are phenomenal. The latter does not replace the former, however. Nelson's AP shells have almost identical penetration over distance to HMS Warspite's 381mm guns, while having a shorter- fuse timer as seen on HMS Hood. This is perfectly adequate (and even ideal) for bullying any cruiser within her matchmaking spread, but it's a different story where battleships are concerned. Her 406mm gun caliber ensures she can overmatch the bows of any cruisers she encounters, as well as the bows of battleships at tiers VII and below. Unfortunately, her ability to land citadel hits against enemy battleships has largely fallen away by ranges of 12km except for the softest skinned targets such as Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya. Landing reliable penetrations becomes questionable outside of 14km. These ranges drop further when Nelson is bottom tier or she's shooting at thick skinned dreadnoughts. Closing the distance isn't always the best option with HMS Nelson. While this does greatly enhance the penetration powers of her 406mm guns, the backup provided by her secondaries is less than inspiring. Nelson's secondary gun complement is divided between 120mm dual-purpose guns in single mounts and six, large twin-gunned 152mm turrets. They are better positioned than those on Dunkerque, but these guns are still poorly laid out to support an attack. The volume of fire they put out is also less than stellar. Her 152mm guns fire a mere five rounds per minute with their AP shells. Her 120mm fire twelve rounds per minute with HE and a great 8% fire chance per hit, but these are largely rear facing and cannot begin engaging an enemy until they're alongside Nelson. Nelson does not appear to use the same dispersion model as Warspite and Hood. Her 1.9 sigma value keeps her groupings tight, however. Nelson's main battery HE shells are something to behold. They boast 6,900 alpha strike per shell, 101mm of penetration, and a 46% fire chance. The list of ships that Nelson can citadel with her HE shells is long -- long enough that a player might be tempted to think that spamming HE shells is an optimal way to play this battleship. While each penetrating hit does land an impressive 2,277 damage, this number quickly falls away as areas become saturated. This leaves her impressive fire starting ability to take over damage dealing which can be hit or miss on focused targets that already have blazes set. Nelson's AP shells should be relied upon as the principle damage dealer for this vessel, with HE used as situational backup. Nelson's HE shells are best used opportunistically, such as when an enemy battleship angles in at a distance, or as a one-off to help support a friendly CV by knocking out masses of AA guns in a single volley. The enormous 39.2m blast area of her shells will cause extensive module damage against any target she strikes, even if they fail to penetrate. These shells have a larger and harder hitting explosion than anything short of the Yamato, Lion and Conqueror. This can leave a formidable AA armament in tatters. It may also force ships to reach for their Damage Control Party consumable to repair disabled engines and steering gears, leaving them vulnerable to follow-up fires. It can even set off the magazines of destroyers and cruisers with the concussive force alone. An Iowa-class battleship can be stripped of all (yes, all) of it's small and medium caliber AA gun mounts in as little as two to three volleys of Nelson's guns. Peppering a few preliminary HE shells around like this in the early stages of a match can go a long way towards helping your CV allies out, especially before closing into more effective AP shell range. Just don't forget to prioritize nailing those cruisers with AP when you see them. Between gun handling, AP and HE performance, Nelson's firepower is incredibly forgiving. A novice player could, in theory, spam HE constantly and still amass some pretty respectable damage totals provided they survived long enough. They would definitely lose out to a Nelson commander who varied their ammunition choices, however. Rivals: Battlecruiser HMS Hood HMS Nelson is the second tier VII premium British battleship in the game, with HMS Hood preceding her by a few months. The two ships are so very different in design and game play as to be almost laughable. Nelson is a slow, enduring and relentless. Hood is fast, flexible and fragile. Nelson is victimized by aircraft and Hood is a nightmare target for enemy carriers. Both struggle when facing tier IX ships. It's HMS Nelson's gunnery which sets her ahead of HMS Hood, in my opinion. Nelson deals damage reliably -- something the British flagship cannot claim, even with its (much) improved accuracy. With the coming of the rest of the Royal Navy line, I wonder if we'll see HMS Hood get some minor tweaks and buffs to bring her into line with the rest of the British ships. Only time will tell. Manoeuvrability Top Speed: 24.0knotsTurning Radius: 750mRudder Shift: 14.9s Maximum Turn Rate: 3.71º/s Nelson is slow. 24.0 knots is almost acceptable. Almost. Nelson is a full knot slower than Nagato which is already a ship that struggles somewhat with agility. This limits Nelson's flexibility and her survivability. She cannot control engagement distances. She cannot escape by outrunning her opponents or the reach of their guns. These problems compound when she faces tier VIII and tier IX opponents where not only are most ships faster than her, the map sizes make her low speed especially punitive. It's only when Nelson is top tier that her low top speed is less of a liability as she faces more of the standard-type American battleships and the distances she needs to cover are further reduced by the smaller maps. Now don't get me wrong -- this isn't Arizona-slow. And while she does have a three knot advantage over Colorado, she does not get Colorado's special speed preservation in a turn. Like most battleships, Nelson bleeds off 25% of her velocity when she's under manoeuvres, slowing down to 18.0 knots with her rudder hard over. If you're applying WASD hax as you should, you'll often see your speed struggling to get over 20 knots and this can feel like a real crawl when you're trying to get into position or you're trying to get away. Nelson is a pig in a turn. Nelson's only saving grace is that she rotates 0.1º/s faster than a Nagato, which isn't saying much. The good news is that she's incapable of out turning her turrets, even with their slow rate of rotation. The bad news is that while she may answer her rudder quickly, the effect of her rudder just isn't substantial enough to throw the ship about. This makes her very vulnerable to torpedo and aircraft attacks. DurabilityHit Points: 59,400Citadel Protection: 32mm anti-torpedo bulge + 356mm belt. Min Bow & Deck Armour: 25mm Torpedo Damage Reduction: 19% Armour layout of Nelson's belt, turrets and citadel. The only additional protection is a 32mm outer hull and upper deck not shown. At first glance, Nelson has horrible durability for facing off against enemy battleships. She has a citadel that sits so high over the water line, you would think she was a copy-paste job of the old Iowa and Montana-class battleships. What's worse, she's tier VII so her enormous bow is only 25mm thick. It gets overmatched by all AP shells larger than 356mm which includes the guns of all tier VII+ battleships with the exception of Scharnhorst. While she does boast some decent armour values, with up to 356mm of belt armour and a 305mm transverse bulkhead on her citadel, they are both heavily overtaxed trying to protect her vitals. The sad reality is that it's this 305mm bow plate which is HMS Nelson's achilles heel. Even with perfect angling (approximately 25º to 26º) bow on to the enemy, this plate just cannot stand up to any guns that can overmatch her bows. Bayern, HMS Hood and Queen Elizabeth need to get close to citadel her through the bow like this. They can only do so at ranges of 12.0km or less. Warspite and Mutsu can pull it off at at 13.0km. Things jump up considerably from there. Colorado can do so reliably from 18.0km. Everything else can do so at ranges in excess of 20km. When under fire from enemy super dreadnoughts, angle as best you can, know your ranges and hold your breath. In short: She eats citadels for days and then begs for a second helping when facing enemy battleships with 380mm guns or larger. Things don't get much better in regards to soaking up torpedoes. HMS Nelson has terrible torpedo protection with only a 19% reduction that can be boosted to a mere 21% with Damage Control System Modification 1. While this is better than that of HMS Hood, at least HMS Hood begins her turns faster. I lost this ship more often to torpedoes than any other damage source. Sometimes it was my own dumb fault. In others, the lack of damage mitigation simply overwhelmed the modest hit point pool of this battleship. Finally, there's the issue of her turrets. I have not been able to isolate why it happens so frequently, but HMS Nelson has her main battery guns disabled very often. B-turret seems especially susceptible. This is strange given the thick armour of her turret faces (406mm) and her barbettes (356mm). My guess is that shells are striking her barbettes or catching the softer sides of the turrets and prompting the critical damage rolls. Whatever the reason, you can expect to have one of your guns temporarily disabled at least once in a match. Yet for all of the deficiencies and even her modest hit point total, Nelson is quite easily capable of being the toughest ship afloat at her tier. This is all thanks to her Repair Party consumable. Unlike most battleships that recover up to 14% of their maximum hit points over 28 seconds, Nelson recovers up to 40% over 20 seconds. Yes, you read that right. This works out to 23,760 hit points that Nelson can heal with each charge of her Repair Party consumable. Nelson will, time and again, appear to be on her last legs only to spring back, hale and healthy and itching for a fight. Adding a India Delta increases this value up to 48% (or 28,512hp) per charge. With Superintendent, this provided HMS Nelson with a theoretical maximum damage total of 173,448 hit points needed before she sinks, provided her consumable is used optimally. I cannot stress this enough. Warspite, a ship known to be a tough little monster, would call receiving 80,000 damage before sinking a good match. This works out roughly 1.5 times her starting health. For Nelson, that number sits around 150,000 damage -- in excess of 2.5x her health pool. You can delay the enemy team simply grace of being a damage sponge they cannot sink quickly. This makes Nelson an absolute beast when it comes to facing enemy cruisers. She can soak the bombardment and the resulting fires for days and deny them any progress with a touch of a button. The only thing that keeps this from being disgustingly overpowered is the aforementioned tendency for Nelson to eat citadel hits. Her Repair Party consumable only queues 10% of citadel damage into the healing pool, while 60% of normal penetrations and 100% of flooding, fire, ramming and over penetrations make it into the queue. Her consumable also shares the long reset timer of other battleships. Large alpha strikes or masses of sustained damage can (and will) sink this ship in between cooldowns. Finally, she only gets two base charges of her Repair Party as opposed to the usual three. Overall, Nelson is incredibly resilient to fire damage because of this consumable. She simply laughs it off and heals all of the damage back, undoing the burn stacked by cruisers, destroyers and dive bombers without issue. This makes this vessel particularly well suited to farming up Fireproof and Dreadnought awards. Nelson is a zombie. If you do not put her down properly, she will keep coming back from the dead. Head shots, in the form of citadel hits or mass torpedo strikes, are the only way to ensure she goes down for good. Concealment & Camouflage Base Surface Detection Range: 15.30km Air Detection Range: 12.36km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 12.76km Main Battery Firing Range: 18.21km Min Surface Detection Rank within Tier: 2nd out of 7 Min Surface Detection Rank within Matchmaking: 19th out of 37 Wargaming has hyped that the Royal Navy battleships at tiers VII+ will have great surface detection stats. That's not present here. Within her own tier, when all of the ships are rigged for stealth, she sits 500m behind King George V and ahead of the Scharnhorst-sisters by 300m or so. In a cross-section of all of the battleships she may face, she's decidedly average, sitting right in the middle of the pack. Regardless if she's top tier or bottom, there are potentially battleships that she'll spot first and others that will be more stealthy. Concealment for a slow warship helps keep them alive. When Nelson silences her guns, her surface detection range goes down to 12.8km with a full stealth build. This can allow her to sneak up on unsuspecting targets until she gets within a more optimal firing range or angle. Sadly, she does not have the speed to really allow her to take advantage of this. Short of one-time ambushes or picking on distracted enemies, it will be very difficult to sneak up upon wary targets. It should be noted that Nelson is a terrible ship for doing her own spotting. She's effectively blind without any consumables to help her in detecting enemy ships, aircraft and torpedoes. Skills like Vigilance become increasingly important for her as a result, especially when it comes to navigating around islands or through channels. Nelson's concealment is alright. It's not a real telling strength, but it's not a liability either until she's uptiered. Anti-Aircraft Defense AA Battery Calibers: 120mm / 40mm / 20mmAA Umbrella Ranges: 4.5km / 2.5km / 2.0kmAA DPS per Aura: 36 / 119 / 126 (133 in 0.6.10) Do not let the big DPS numbers fool you. Nelson's anti-aircraft firepower isn't as healthy as it looks. It boils down to two issues. Nelson's AA firepower lacks range. Nelson's AA firepower is concentrated in a small number of fragile mount-clusters. Nelson doesn't boast the best range with her anti-aircraft firepower. The 4.5km reach on her dual-purpose mounts is disappointing but would workable if they did more damage. Unfortunately, the majority of her strength is located in her small and medium caliber mounts. Nelson's 40mm pom-poms only reach out to a range of 2.5km and her 20mm guns reach out to 2.0km. This largely limits her anti-aircraft firepower to self defense actions only and she cannot provide fleet support, even when specialized with AA Guns Modification 2 and Advanced Fire Training. The small firepower total from her 102mm guns ensures that Manual Fire Control for AA Guns just isn't worthwhile. But it gets worse. Her anti-aircraft defense is easily knocked out by even small amounts of HE fire. Nelson only has six of the octuple pom-pom mounts. Losing one reduces her medium range AA firepower by 19.8dps, and four of these guns are mounted in pairs along the long axis of the ship, making them easy prey for bombs and HE spam. Things don't get any better with her 20mm Oerlikons. She has thirty five scattered across the surface of the ship (with two more being added in 0.6.10). However, they are packed closely together in large groups which reduces their survivability. For example, ten of these reside in a tight cluster on her bow in front of A-turret. Any HE salvos will usually knock out these small caliber mounts in handfuls, quickly decimating Nelson's AA effectiveness. The only real ray of sunshine is that Nelson has fairly decent protection against American AP Bombs. Tests have shown that only a rare drop with all bombs hitting will cause anywhere close to 10,000 damage. More often than not this sat at a considerably lower total. Preliminary tests with Graf Zeppelin's AP bombs were much more damning, however, but these are still in the development phase and very much a work in progress. In summary: Nelson has pretty good raw AA values, but this is only useful for self defense and it will not hold up over the course of a battle. Taking even minor HE damage can quickly gut the potency of her flak. While the ship is pristine, she'll put up a good fight against aircraft, but their short range means that the enemy will still drop their ordnance. With luck, you'll simply make it expensive for them to do so. Dive Bombers do not present Nelson with that much of a threat, even if they're armed with AP Bombs. She's able to heal back any resulting damage with ease. Torpedo bombers are another matter, however. Nelson's anti-aircraft firepower isn't up to the task of keeping her safe. Nevermind the Manoeuvres HMS Nelson is a little weird when it comes to choosing her skills: short of her core skills, she just doesn't care. Optimizing HMS Nelson really doesn't go beyond ensuring she has Superintendent and Concealment Expert. After that, do what you want. There are three general builds which will likely end up popular. Of these three, a Survivability Build is optimal. Next comes a general anti-aircraft build (minus Manual Fire Control for AA Guns which is all but useless for her). This second build will be pretty similar to low-tier (and very high tier) Royal Navy battleship builds. Finally, you can specialize towards spamming HE like a derp cause it's hilarious. The core for all three builds is as follows: At the first tier, Preventative Maintenance is the optimal choice, but only if your own situational awareness is elevated to such a degree that you can track threats when spotted. If not, then Priority Target should be your default choice. At tier two, take Adrenaline Rush. As you take damage, your DPM will increase. Note that with the huge jumps back and forth with Nelson's hit point pool, the gains from this skill vary considerably. Alternatively, you can take Expert Marksman for better gun handling, though Nelson isn't hurting here much. At tier three, take Superintendent. This will increase the number of charges of your Repair Party by one. And finally, at tier four, take Concealment Expert. You're a big ship, but you're not Fuso-Fat. This will help keep you alive and give you more time to use your Repair Party. You can place the next nine points where you wish. Survivability Build This is, in my opinion, the best way to build up Nelson. Reach for skills that will keep you in the fight longer and improve your damage output. High Alert, Basics of Survivability, Vigilance, and Fire Prevention are all great skills for this, so pick and choose your favourites. Make sure you take Preventative Maintenance too if you took Priority Target as your first skill. Your guns are going to get knocked out a lot. Anti-Aircraft Build Be aware that while Nelson has some pretty potent looking AA DPS numbers, her anti-aircraft firepower will only ever be for self-defense purposes and not fleet support. In addition, it's incredibly fragile and easily knocked out by even a small volume of HE fire. While the ship is pristine, she can be a thorny target for carriers but she's never going to be considered a "good" flak platform. If you wish to go this route, take Basic and Advanced Fire Taining for a total of 7pts. High Alert or Expert Marksman (or Adrenaline Rush if you opted for the other) are your best choices for the remaining two points. HE Spammer Now, for the player that wants to derp around with HE shells, let's talk about specific HE-boosting skills. DO NOT take Demolition Expert. The difference between 46% and 48% fire chance just isn't worth the investment. This is too expensive a skill for too little gain. Expert Loader might actually find some use, though, when you need to smarten up and reach for your AP shells. Now let's talk about Inertial Fuse for HE Shells. HMS Nelson is fully capable of damaging any ship within her matchmaking spread with HE without any need for taking this skill. This includes battleships and the armoured deck of carriers like Taiho. Her penetration is so high, she can citadel almost half of the cruisers in her matchmaking spread. Doing so provides a big boost to Nelson's damage totals, but this is a harder shot to land than with AP shells. Here's the list of cruisers HMS Nelson can citadel stock with HE: France: De Grasse, Charles Martel, St.Louis United Kingdom: Emerald, Leander Soviet Union: Kirov, Murmansk, Krasny Krym, Molotov, Shchors, Chapayev, Mikhail Kutuzov United States: Omaha, Marblehead, Pensacola, Atlanta, Flint, Indianapolis Japan: Furutaka, Aoba, Mogami, Ibuki Others: Perth. Taking Inertial Fuse for HE Shells only opens up small sections of battleships to penetration damage and none of them large enough to be worth it (with the exception of HMS Hood and Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya which each have large sections of their upper hull that becomes vulnerable). It does nothing to help you with aircraft carriers or destroyers. Where it does come into use is against cruisers. Taking the skill adds the following ships that HMS Nelson can now citadel: France: La Galissonniere, Algerie, United Kingdom: Fiji, Belfast, Edinburgh, Neptune Soviet Union: Budyonny United States: Cleveland, New Orleans Japan: Myoko, ARP Myoko, ARP Ashigara, ARP Haguro, ARP Nachi, Eastern Dragon, Atago, ARP Takao You'll note the absence of German cruisers and the Italian premium, Duca d'Aosta. The spaced armour around their citadels prevents HE from penetrating their machine spaces (though the modules themselves can still be damaged by the shockwave). Note that all of the French ships listed above are also largely immune but they were included because of small sections directly beneath their turrets that will allow HE to citadel them. Landing citadel hits with HE is different than landing them with AP shells. HE shells detonate immediately upon contact with any surface. Thus, you need to bulls-eye the outer citadel wall to land these high-damage hits. On some of these vessels, the amount of surface area is painfully small -- sometimes only a sliver over the waterline. The only consolation is that HE shells don't concern themselves with angle at all. Whatever surface upon which they first make contact is the one affected by the attack, so you can do some rather rude things to select ships that might otherwise bounce AP shells. I must stress, however, that as fun as it may sound to citadel cruisers with HE shells no matter how they angle, Nelson can do this with AP shells most of the time anyway. AP shells also do more damage. As hilarious as it is to make Belfasts cry when you not only carve out most of their hit points with an HE volley but also blow apart their modules and set fires, your four skill points could be better spent elsewhere. You don't really need any special skills if you want to be an HE spammer in this ship. Feel free to toss your Belfast Captain in here if you want, though. Jack Dunkirk The Legendary Commander, Jack Dunkirk, makes a rather good Royal Navy Battleship captain. His Smoke Screen Expert bonus is wasted upon these Dreadnoughts, however, but the bonuses he provides to Jack of All Trades and Expert Marksman makes him very appealing for ships like Nelson. Remember, so long as the commander build includes the skills Superintendent and Concealment Expert, Nelson is largely forgiving. So, if Jack has skills specialized for one of your cruisers, he can still train in Nelson with only a small dip in expected performance. Boom, baby! Nelson using HE in the opening stages of a match, bombarding an enemy Scharnhorst at 17km. By her fourth salvo, Nelson had destroyed both of the Scharnhorst's torpedo tubes, set three fires and crippled her anti-aircraft battery. Overall Impressions Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / Challenging / Difficult Nelson is really going to punish novice players. They're going to make mistakes and Nelson is going to slap them around for it. Her armour needs a subtle touch to be angled properly. Spamming HE doesn't generate great damage numbers. Her AP will bounce a lot at long ranges. She's too slow and too big to easily extract herself from trouble situations or to position herself where she's needed most. Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / High / Extreme In the hands of an expert, Nelson becomes a different beast altogether. She just will not die. Proper management of her Repair Party will have her coming back from the dead twice over, ensuring that her team can have a near full-health battleship late in the game, even after tanking a ton of damage. Similarly, proper ammunition use can pay enormous dividends. Her carry potential is limited by her slow speed and lack of vision control, however. Mouse's Summary: She's like a zombie. Without a headshot to put her down for good, she keeps rising from the grave. Her HE shells are a hella fun to use, but it's a mistake to rely on them heavily. You'll kick yourself for every time you have HE loaded and some dumb cruiser or battleship suddenly offers up her broadside. She does not up-tier as well as Nagato, Gneisenau or Scharnhorst. This ship is so much fun. So I know the big question on everyone's mind: Can you spam nothing but HE shells and make this thing work? The answer is 'yes'. You won't do as much damage as you would if you fired AP shells, but it's entirely possible for you to just spit out walls of HE shells instead of anything else and rack up some decent damage and kill totals. The catch is always going to be that you could have done more damage if you fired AP instead. In close matches where the outcome is neck and neck, the lost opportunities to land AP citadel hits may well end up costing you the game. The wiki-editors and I challenged one another to try playing some matches where we shot nothing but HE. Topping 120,000 damage was more difficult than a mix of AP and HE, but it was possible, especially with stacking fires. So, go ahead and spit out nothing but flaming death onto your opponents if you want, just be aware that your damage (and win rate) will take a small hit as a result. This ship seems to be designed to farm salt from the enemy. Between the fires she can set and the absolutely trollish heals, she'll make the enemy want to focus you down hard and fast (lewd!). It's absolutely mean what you can do with her HE shells. See that Scharnhorst / Gneisenau / Tirpitz that's trying to brawl your friends? It would be a shame if someone tore off their torpedo tubes, wouldn't it? Or how about that North Carolina that thinks itself immune to air attack from your tier VII Kaga division mate? It would be a shame if someone stripped them of all of their close and medium range AA power. This is the kind of nonsense that Nelson's HE allows you to do better than other battleships at her tier and it's a very fun shakeup of the usual game play. For all of these tricks and hilarity HE can offer, her AP is still just so much better. Why butcher a New Orleans' AA firepower when you can just blow their citadels out of the water instead? While it's fun to congratulate yourself for a 5-shell, 11,385 damage high explosive volley, this is still less than a single AP shell citadel hit (barring fires of course). There are right times to fire HE, do not get me wrong, but AP should really be the staple of your damage totals in this vessel. Nelson is a good ship, but she's not great. She's got three big flaws in my opinion: Her citadel is too high. She's blind. She's too slow. That high water citadel is going to be a deal breaker for some. When you're up against someone that really knows how to aim (or simply in a tier IX battleship), her weak spots are all but impossible to protect. This all but negates the awesomeness of her Repair Party consumable. And speaking of negating her Repair Party, torpedoes have a habit of doing this too. She has no tricks to help her spot these warheads or their source before it's already too late -- destroyers can pester you with impunity. Given the island humping meta that's so essential to master, Nelson really feels the pinch when she can't send up a plane to take a quick peek on what's going on around the corner. Finally, she is slow. And, I think the worst thing about Nelson's slow speed is that she's not slow enough that many players will see it for the flaw that it is. Nelson will get caught out on occasion and it will cost you games -- not a lot of them, but enough to impact her overall performance. Her big gimmick, though, is damage management. I put an India Delta signal on my Nelson and I took no small amount of pleasure announcing in all chat, "Watch my hp," as my poor, battered dreadnought jumped from 1/3rd of her hit points remaining back up to a hale and healthy 5/6th remaining. The outrage was delicious. I even made a Belfast player complain Nelson was OP when I denied him a kill by healing up from 1,200hp to almost 30,000. Pulling this off requires careful management of your concealment and positioning, disengaging from the thick of the fighting to lick your wounds and then returning to the fray as fast as your slow speed will allow. If it weren't for those three aforementioned flaws, Nelson would be overpowered as all get out. As it is, she's an excellent competitor for any veteran player and she will challenge you to find balance between ammunition choices, fighting at the head of the pack and withdrawing to conduct repairs. Rivals: Battleship USS Missouri HMS Nelson is the second premium vessel to be made available for free experience. The first was USS Missouri, the tier IX American battleship. Missouri's price tag weighs in at a hefty 750,000 free experience -- double that of HMS Nelson. So the question becomes: if you had to choose one, which one would you get? Obviously, if a player prefers one nation's game play over another, that will bias them in favour of a given vessel, but in terms of raw utility, it's hard to argue against the American juggernaut. Missouri has an enormous credit-earning coefficient baked into the ship. She trivializes the earning of credits, with even a poor game netting players in excess of 200,000 to 300,000 credits. Players that own Missouri have posted battle results screens showing them earning over 1.5M credits in a single match. No other premium vessel in the game is as profitable. HMS Nelson simply cannot compete with her on that level. Would I Recommend? Nelson can only be acquired (so I'm told) by spending 375,000 free experience. At a 1 doubloon to 25xp conversion rate, this works out to a cost of $63.25 USD for this ship if you had to buy the 15,000 doubloons necessary at full price. Weigh this against the cost of Scharnhorst, another tier VII premium battleship which weighs in at $42.99 including the port slot (which you'll have to pay extra for with Nelson). PVE Battles How well does the ship maintain profitability in Co-Op modes and how does she fare against bots? Battleships almost always do well in Co-Op battles. Nelson does alright, though be aware that things can get a bit tight on coin if you run with premium consumables and you don't have a premium account. We haven't seen any tier VII scenarios yet, so it's difficult to say if she'll meet their requirements well or not. Random Battle Grinding:This includes training captains, collecting free experience, earning credits and collecting signal flags from achievements. If you're not going to get USS Missouri, then hells to the yeah. If nothing else, Nelson will print Fireproof and Dreadnought medals like you will not believe. She's not a bad Arsonist and Witherer farmer either if you want to derp around with HE shells. She's a great trainer for your Belfast Captains in this regard (even if there are going to be some wasted skills here and there). She also works well for training your RN Battleship commanders given that she accepts most builds with a shrug of her shoulders. For Competitive Gaming:Competitive Gaming includes Ranked Battles and other skill-based tournaments. This also includes stat-padding. Nelson will rock people's socks in Ranked Battles. A fire slinging, super-healing, bow-tanking battleship? Unless she's put down quickly, she's just going to keep coming back and driving the enemy team nuts. When she's not on your team, you're going to hate it when your team mates waste ineffective firepower on her. She gets my vote. For Collectors:If you enjoy ship history or possessing rare ships, this section is for you. I would have preferred HMS Rodney -- Nelson's sister ship has a much more storied history. While HMS Nelson served throughout WWII, her exploits mostly involved catching 4 torpedoes and 3 naval mines through the course of her career. She saw little to no surface action, being too slow to catch the Scharnhorst-sisters and too far away to participate in engaging Bismarck. For Fun Factor: Bottom line: Is the ship fun to play? Depending on your play style and your tolerance for derp, Nelson is either going to be the most fun you can have in a battleship with your pants on or a lackluster mehbote that does nothing for you. I have a high stupid-tolerance, so I say yes. What's the Final Verdict?How would the ship rate on an Angry YouTuber scale of Garbage - Meh - Gud - Overpowered? GARBAGE - Grossly uncompetitive and badly in need of buffs.Mehbote - Average ship. Has strengths and weaknesses. Doesn't need buffs to be viable, but certainly not advantageous.Gudbote - A strong ship that has obvious competitive strengths and unique features that make it very appealing.OVERPOWERED - A ship with very clear advantages over all of its competitors and unbalancing the game with its inclusion.
  5. Anyone else consider RN attack aircraft a waste of deck space? I'm talking about the Sea Hurricane, Firefly, Seafire and Wyvern. They're fighters They're slower than the bombers they accompany Their speed boosts last barely a few seconds (so in no way compensate for ultra slow speed) Rockets highly RNG dependent when you finally get to target They're very fragile. I get slow speed and fragility for rocket-carrying Hurricanes (an out-dated, adapted fighter). I get fragility for Seafires (designed to be an interceptor, and as such was the fastest naval fighter of the war). I don't get slow speed and fragility for the Firefly (which was actually built to be a rocket strike and recon aircraft. Yes. That is why it was a heavy fleet fighter. The second person was for long range navigation and recon.) I don't get the slow speed and fragility of the Wyvern (which was actually built to be a strike fighter). People say "use them to spot". I say ... what? At that speed? And use my torp/carpet bombers as at least their speed boost has some sort of duration and means my intel is sort of timely. People say "use them to contest cap" ... what? By the time they get there, the DD has done their job. And that perfectly aligned rocket drop goes ahead, behind, above and below the target - not on it. People say "use them to deliver fighter cover" ... what? By the time they get there, the squadron has either been shredded by enemy ships or the ship they are supposed to support has been sunk. People say "it's about the flavour" ... I say Seriously, they're only there to fill the time between waiting for the torp and carpet bomber squadrons to restock. I'm really, really hesitant to consider buying Indomitable (a shame as I'm such a big RN carrier fan). She's only going to carry fighters: Sea Hornets. The Sea Hornets were among the fastest piston engined aircraft ever built. They were also ultra nimble, and ultra-long ranged. I shudder to think what Wargaming will do to them.
  6. HMS Vanguard is the ghost of the Royal Navy battleship tech tree everyone wanted to see. Ostensibly, HMS Vanguard was designed to be a tier VIII version of HMS Warspite. However, Vanguard falls short of this aspiration. For a high-tier Royal Navy battleship, she's surprisingly not idiot-proof, with a vulnerable citadel that needs to be protected with angling and manoeuvres. What's most exciting: Her AP shells are wonderful. Wargaming has offered some concessions to both of the fans of the current Royal Navy battleship line. They included HMS Monarch's excellent high explosive shells to Vanguard's arsenal, ensuring that these two players can continue spamming HE without a guilty conscience while everyone else rolls their eyes. I want to thank Wargaming for providing me access to this ship. This is the release version of the vessel and all of the statistics discussed here are current as of November 15th, 2018. PROS Large hit point pool of 71,700hp. Main battery has a quick 25s reload and excellent gun handling. Has the same dispersion pattern as Warspite, Hood and Queen Elizabeth and boasts 2.0 sigma, making her one of the most precise battleships in the game. Excellent AP and HE performance for a 381mm shell, including good penetration and damage values, rewarding versatile ammunition choice. Very fast rudder shift time for a battleship of 9.7 seconds. Improved Repair Party, queuing and healing back more than standard and with fast reset timer. CONS Exposed, above-water citadel. Absolutely appalling firing angles on her main battery. Main battery is only eight 381mm rifles creating issues with overmatching and DPM. AA defense is for self defense only and is concentrated in 3.5km range, medium caliber mounts that are easily knocked out. Large turning radius of 850m and slow rate of turn exacerbates the issues with her fire angles. Overview The maximum rotation positions of X and Y turret (her rear guns). They are not new-player friendly. They're not even veteran-player friendly. Vanguard's terrible fire angles so utterly dominate her game play, I felt the tremendous compulsion to wear white-lace and beg her to be gentle. These fire angles screwed me over more times than I can count. Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / CHALLENGING / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / HIGH / Extreme Vanguard encourages players to sail with their broadsides exposed. With her above-water citadel, you can imagine how well she's going to go over with novice players. You know what? Never mind the novices. The veterans are going to find this frustrating too as it limits the amount of firepower she can dish out when trading. She's a battleship that reward cautious, opportunistic play -- which is review-speak for "hide in the back, shoot when you can and don't brawl". – One of, if not the worst at its tier. This is a pronounced weakness. – Middle of the pack at its tier. Not terrible, but not terribly good either. – Has a significant advantage over her tier mates. A solid, competitive performer. – No other ship at its tier does this as well as this ship. Vanguard has strengths and weaknesses across the board, giving her a rating in Offense, Agility, Anti-Air and Vision Control. It's only in Defense where she stands out with a rating. Her citadel is very vulnerable for a battleship, however she counters this with a the largest hit point pool at her tier and an amazing Repair Party consumable. Options Aside from Vanguard's Repair Party, there's nothing out of the ordinary to be found here. Consumables Vanguard's Damage Control Party is standard for a British battleship. She has unlimited charges. It has a 15 second action time and a 120s / 80s reset timer. Her Repair Party is improved. See the DEFENSE section below. There's a lot to go over. This starts with 3 charges base. Upgrades Optimization of Vanguard's upgrades will see the usual suspects rear their tired old heads. Start with Main Armaments Modification 1. Next take Damage Control Systems Modification 1. You've got a choice in your third slot. As ever, emphasizing gunnery is best so your first pick here should be Aiming Systems Modification 1. However, if you're salty about CVs, taking AA Guns Modification 2 is an okay choice. It's not great, but it's okay. Damage Control Modification 2 is arguably the best choice for most players in slot 4. You can elect to take Steering Gears Modification 2 to emphasize the strengths of her already quick rudder shift time. Be aware this is harder to make use of optimally even if it can yield higher results -- it's easier to tank damage than it is to dodge it, after all. Finally, take everyone's favourite no-brainer: Concealment Modification 1. Camouflage Vanguard comes with Type 10 Camouflage. This provides: 50% bonus experience gains 10% reduction to maintenance costs 3% reduction in surface detection 4% reduction in enemy accuracy. Firepower Main Battery: Eight 381mm guns in 4x2 turrets in an A-B-X-Y superfiring configuration. Secondary Battery: Sixteen 134mm guns in 8x2 turrets. These are superfiring with two forward facing and two rear facing per side. Secondaries Let's start with the small guns. You can largely forget that Vanguard has secondaries. These 134mm guns lack the range, reload time and volume of fire needed to present a credible threat to opponents. This is really unfortunate given their nice shell weight and fire chance. If they had the range or they had the rate of fire, maybe a secondary build would be fun to play around with. Lamentably, it's a mistake to invest anything in upgrading these weapons -- they simply can't do what you need them to. At best they might be able to start a fire on an enemy capital ship that strays too close. However, with Vanguard's high citadel, getting into a brawl is a death sentence, so stay out of secondary range. Main Battery Precision There's so much to like about Vanguard's main battery. First of, there's her precision. Vanguard is a blast from the past, sharing same horizontal dispersion value of the older British premium battleships, including Hood and Warspite. Inside of 12km, she overtakes even the vaunted Japanese battleship accuracy, making her much more adept at picking off close range targets like destroyers. Combined with her 2.0 sigma value, landing hits feels very comfortable, even at long ranges. Standard dispersion test for my reviews -- 180 shells fired at 15km locked onto a stationary target Fuso without camouflage. She was equipped with Aiming Systems Modification 1. Vanguard doesn't quite enjoy the same level of precision as Warspite owing to her faster shell velocity and energy preservation. This gives her a larger vertical dispersion area at all ranges. However, this does lead to improved shell lead times making gunnery easier. Note that Vanguard suffers from a lot of "downward drift" which adds a margin of error to these shell maps as I had to readjust aim with every volley fired. Thus the dispersion area maybe slightly smaller than shown. Shell Performance Vanguard's HE shells don't share the same performance anachronism as her dispersion. They're modern, almost (but not quite) matching HMS Monarch's HE, including her shell damage and penetration. Monarch's have a 1% higher chance to set blazes over Vanguard, though -- don't ask me why. Vanguard doesn't quite match up to the tech tree Royal Navy battleships for fire setting ability. This is good news to me -- it removes some of the brainless quality of HE spam. When you do reach over for her AP shells, you're rewarded with a welcome change from other Royal Navy battleship AP. Like Warspite before her, Vanguard has a longer fuse timer with her AP. This has a few effects. The downside is that she's more likely to overpenetrate soft targets, including broadside cruisers and battleship extremities. The upside is that it provides her AP with increased bite for reaching machine spaces and magazines buried deeper within the core of enemy warships -- especially those with spaced armour protecting their citadels. Vanguard is especially good at punishing broadside battleships at range. Approximate penetration values for Vanguard's AP shells. Vanguard's HE shells are fixed with 95mm of penetration -- not quite enough to punish the few exposed citadels found on high tier cruisers. Inertial Fuse for HE Shells will add a few more ships to the roster that her HE can punish, but it's not worth the points investment. Data pulled from World of Warships AP Calculator. Site linked in the appendix. Penetration wise, her AP shells are well setup, having comparable bite to Tirpitz and Bismarck. It pays to keep their caliber in mind, however. Her 381mm shells cannot overmatch the 27mm bows of American and German heavy cruisers. As good as Vanguard's AP shells are, spamming nothing but won't do you any more favours than if you used HE shells exclusively. Switch shells often in Vanguard and she'll reward you. Vanguard's fast 25 second reload facilitates swapping between ammunition while also padding her damage output when it comes time to cycle her guns. Damage output among the tier VIII battleships is very close. Vanguard keeps pace with her fast rate of fire, compensating for her smaller armament. As ever, take these numbers with a pinch of salt -- they do not represent the challenges of getting shells on target or penetrating when they get there. For whatever reason, Vanguard's HE shells only have a 34% base fire chance as opposed to Monarch's 35%. This creates an increased gap in their fire setting potential and makes Vanguard no better of a fire starter than American battleships. Still the increased damage she dispenses makes this more than worthwhile. Before any of you get yourself all hot and bothered about Monarch's fire setting, Cleveland (the gold-standard of tier VIII burnination) can spit out 9.97 fires per minute with the IFHE penalty and no other buffs. The same disclaimers apply for this chart as the others -- this is merely an indicator of performance and does not represent actual in game results. A myriad of factors will always conspire to mitigate a ship's ability to set fires including (but not limited to), target selection, opportunity, shell dispersion, fire resistance, etc. The Deal Breaker All of these strengths are present to pad for one massive weakness: Vanguard's appalling fire angles. Vanguard has a fast rate of fire, great HE shells, fast turret traverse and excellent precision because her fire angles are so bad. It's all meant to be compensation because Vanguard must present a near perfect broadside in order to fire all eight of her guns at a target. This leaves her incredibly vulnerable to reprisals. She is functionally incapable of autobouncing enemy shells while firing her full armament and instead she must rely on her armour thickness to repel shells. At anything but the longest of ranges, this is a fool's errand. Thus, Vanguard often has to sacrifice firepower in order to properly angle against her enemies. This is why her gun performance is so good: she's often forced to fight with only half of her weapons. Wargaming have done everything they can to make it easier to bring the other half to bear when possible. Her gun traverse is quick. Her reload is fast. She answers her rudder quickly too to help swing her butt out to unmask her guns. I'm not going to lie: These bad fire angles are enough to put me off this ship entirely, which is saying a lot given all of the wonderful perks her guns otherwise enjoy. Vanguard has the same (terrible) forward firing angles as the King George V-class battleships. However, her rearward firing angles are worse than the tier VII battleship. No matter how you choose to engage an enemy, when you use all eight of Vanguard's guns, you open yourself up to return-fire and potential citadel damage. Bad firing angles are one of my personal pet-peeves. I can stomach a lot of things, up to and including sluggish gun traverse, but not bad fire angles. This has greatly soured my opinion of this ship. Summary Secondaries are bad. Her main guns perform beautifully provided you can use all of them. Her fire angles will get you killed. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : I almost gave her a rating here -- that's how bad her fire angles are. However, there's just too many perks glued onto her weapons to make that a fair assessment. She'd need a much faster rate of fire before I would consider bumping this up. Or, you know, completely redesign the ship to give her better fire angles. That would work too. Defense Hit Points: 71,700 Min Bow & Deck Armour: 32mm Maximum Citadel Protection: 356mm Torpedo Damage Reduction: 25% Armour Protection The 356mm/343mm armour is replicated again around her rear magazine. Her turret faces are 343mm front, 228mm side, 178mm rear, and 152mm on top with 305mm barbettes. Let's start with the elephant in the room: Vanguard's citadel sits over the waterline. Much fuss will be made over this and rightly so. Only Roma shares this high-water vulnerability and the Italian ship is much better equipped to angle and bounce incoming fire. The net effect is that Vanguard is more likely to take citadel damage than other battleships when someone catches her side. This isn't to say that citadel damage is an exclusive weakness to Vanguard. However, it pays to keep her vulnerability in mind. Her aforementioned firing angles on her main battery guns exacerbates this problem. When Vanguard is firing all eight of her weapons, whatever she's shooting at has an easy target from which to farm damage. What makes Vanguard's fire angles such a liability compared to other battleships has to do with autobounce mechanics. Let's get technical for a moment to explain why. If AP shells cannot overmatch armour, there's an autobounce check. This occurs before any penetration attempts are made. The angle of the shell is compared to the angle of the surface it strikes. Normally, battleship AP shells that hit with an acute angle of 30º or less will auto-ricochet. This is why bow-tanking is so prevalent -- shells simply slide off the ship's bow and deck, unable to bite into the armour. No matter how much penetration a shell has, if it strikes at too shallow of an angle, your ship can avoid damage. Normally, battleship AP shells that hit with an angle of 45º or more cannot autoricochet. Any shells that strike between 45º and 90º to the hull will follow normal penetration mechanics. In between these two values, the auto-ricochet chance scales linearly. For Vanguard, when she fires her all eight guns forward at a 43º angle, any return fire from her target has only a 13% chance of suffering a ricochet. When she fires all eight guns to the rear at a 40º angle, this improves to a 33% chance. Most battleships are capable of firing all of their guns 35º off their bow, allowing them to ricochet shells automatically 2/3s of the time. The steeper they angle themselves, the better this defense. This mechanic is absolutely essential for keeping battleships safe from the monstrous levels of penetration found at higher tiers. Not only does it provide a better chance of automatically deflecting shells, it adds relative thickness to their armour belts. The steeper you angle, the greater the effective thickness. Vanguard's belt has between 503mm and 522mm worth of protection at 43º. However, if she could fire at 35º off her bow, this would increase to 598mm to 621mm. Data pulled from proships.ru (link in the Appendix). Values are approximate, usually with about 5% higher estimates than Wargaming's values published in their Armada series of videos. You can see by these values that at range, Vanguard makes an excellent bully when top tier -- with rare exceptions, she can unmask her X and Y turrets and fire, confident that her belt will be proof against return fire. This falls away when dueling with tier VIII+ opponents. With few exceptions, they all have the raw penetration needed to best her belt while she fires a broadside. Her citadel protection isn't all bad, though. First off, AP bombs can't citadel you. Hooray! Second, shots that land high that attempt to bi-pass her belt and drop down into her citadel have to contend with a 32mm citadel roof. Only Yamato and Musashi's 460mm guns can overmatch this, meaning that any other shell will skip off the top of her machine spaces for only penetration damage. Thus it's only shots fired directly at her waterline which can damage her citadel. The use of Priority Target is almost a must to alert you when enemies are looking your way to give you time to angle in and protect yourself. Vanguard needs time to stack damage -- to find those moments where she can sit broadside and make excellent use of her precision and rate of fire but don't push your luck when you're taking hits. There's one last little point of contention with Vanguard's protection scheme: With the entirety of her deck and extremities boasting no more than 32mm of armour, Vanguard is a juicy target for light cruisers. Expect to burn a lot if they catch you out in the open. Provided you can protect Vanguard's citadel (and that's a pretty big if), she has the largest effective hit point pool of any of the tier VIII battleships. With optimal use of her consumable, her theoretical maximum (less Survivability Expert) effectively doubles her hit point pool. In practice, you're never going to see that kind of number. Repair Party If Vanguard appears a little squishy, she all but makes up for it with her excellent Repair Party consumable. While she doesn't boast the same portable dry-dock found on HMS Lion, Nelson and Conqueror, she has the next best thing. Here's the bonuses she has baked in: Her Repair Party resets quickly. The reset timer on consumable is 90 seconds / 60 seconds for standard / premium. Compare this to the usual 120 seconds / 80 seconds of the normal Repair Party. She queues up 60% of penetration damage. This is admittedly standard for Royal Navy battleships, so Vanguard doesn't stand apart from the rest of the ships in her line. For most other battleships it's 50%. Vanguard queues up 33% of citadel damage. This is huge. While it would best to avoid taking citadel damage of any kind, Vanguard heals up more than the 10% of other battleships. Keep in mind, this also applies to torpedo damage which is the most common form of citadel damage battleships receive. This is especially good in Vanguard's case given her poor anti-torpedo protection. She heals up to 16.8% of her hit points per charge. Normal Repair Party mechanics heal up only 14% over 28 seconds -- or 0.5% per second. Vanguard enjoys a 20% boost over this like Warspite, healing 0.6% per second over the same time period. With up to five charges at her disposal through the use of premium and skills, Vanguard's faster reset timer ensures that she's able to make full use of her health regeneration. Her enormous hit point pool also guarantees big returns as Repair Party scales with a ship's starting hit point total. Summary For all of Vanguard's potential vulnerability with her high citadel, she's well equipped to mitigate and manage said damage. When she's top tier, the vulnerability of her citadel drops down considerably, making her very powerful. Light cruisers are always going to be pain in the butt, though, and beware HE spam from battleships too. Vanguard isn't done yet with her tricks, though, as you'll see in the AGILITY section below. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : Can a battleship with an exposed citadel even be considered ? It feels a bit of a stretch to me, but if you can keep her citadel protected, Vanguard is hella tough. That's a pretty big 'if' though when she's not top tier. She may lose her current rating when the North Carolina Repair Party buff goes through. Agility Top Speed: 30.0 knots Port Turning Radius: 850m Rudder Shift Time: 9.7 seconds (!) 4/4 Engine Speed Turning Rate: 4.1º/s The big thing to talk about here is Vanguard's rudder shift time. Now I've harped on rudder shift before -- it's a mean to an end, not an end of itself. Boasting that a ship has a great rudder shift time is like boasting that a ship has great range on its main battery guns -- it's nice to have but it's not a good indicator of a ship's performance. The same applies here. Vanguard answers her rudder quickly and her movements are much more precise as a result, but it would be a mistake to call this ship agile. Vanguard's rate of turn holds her back. 4.1º/s is painfully average for a high tier battleship. She sits well behind ships like the Richelieu-class sisters and the South Dakota-class sisters. This is caused by two things. One, her turning radius is big. Two, she doesn't have any baked in bonuses to help her preserve speed in the turn. The upside to her modest handling (and it's a stretch to call this a benefit) is that she can't out turn her turrets. She starts with a 5.0º/s rotation on her main battery guns and Expert Marksman only widens the gap, making adjusting her fire very comfortable if it weren't for those damned firing arcs. Vanguard's fast rudder shift time is almost good enough to allow her to fire her guns and angle back quickly enough to avoid reprisals. Almost. The simple fact of the matter, going from a 30º aspect to a 43º and back again takes too long. I never managed better than 15 seconds during trials. You might be able to pull this off against an inexperienced opponent but this is owing more to their mistakes rather than the merits of the ship itself. If you want to be able to fire all eight of Vanguard's guns while not getting your citadel blown out, you're going to have to play clever. Now just because Vanguard can't wiggle-wiggle-shoot doesn't preclude her from being able to dodge. This is something she's quite good at and where her rudder shift time makes her deliciously unpredictable. You'll still need range in order to pull this off, but you can pretend to begin unmasking your guns in order to bait shots and then double back on your course to bounce their shells. Similarly, the amount of bounce and twirl in her badonkadonk makes her a real nuisance for destroyers to land torpedoes. Vanguard is all about frustrating gunnery -- both yours and your opponents. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : She's not a speed demon like the French botes nor wiggling like the SoDaks. She's also not a thunderbutt like Kii, so there's that. I was personally hoping to see her preserve a little more speed in the turn to get her rotation rate up -- that would have done it, but it didn't pan out during testing. Anti-Aircraft Defense AA Gun Calibers: 134mm / 40mm AA Umbrella Ranges: 5.2km / 3.5km AA DPS per Aura: 68 / 413.1 For personal defense, Vanguard's anti-aircraft firepower is excellent -- comparable to the American battleships. However, that's about as far as it extends. Vanguard lacks the weight of fire with her dual purpose guns to be a credible threat to aircraft further out. This precludes any claims of efficiency with Manual Fire Control for AA Guns -- too much of her flak is focused upon her 3.5km 40mm batteries. This adds a second weakness: her medium caliber weapons don't stand up to punishment very well. If you've taken even a light dusting of HE shells, odds are your anti-aircraft firepower is nowhere near as formidable as it once was. So, while you're pristine and perfect, you'll shred planes. It's worth investing in Advanced Fire Training to help boost this further, but that's about as far as improving her anti-aircraft firepower should go. Hey look, I made it through a section without mentioning her awful fire ang -- aw, damn it. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : She's very close. Were it not for FOUR American battleships all having very similar AA firepower (and Kii besides), she might be able to muscle in and make her presence felt. As it is, she sits in their shadow. Refrigerator Base Surface Detection: 16.04km Air Detection Range: 13.7km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 12.04km Detection Range When Firing in Smoke: 14.73km Main Battery Firing Range: 20.0km There's not much to go over here. Vanguard's concealment is "sufficient unto the task" and nothing more. She sits in the middle of the pack for surface detection behind Monarch (14.6km), Roma (14.9km) and North Carolina (15.7km) and just ahead of the Alabama-twins (16.2km) and Bismarck-sisters (16.4km). Vision Control consumables are rare at this tier, being limited to Bismarck's Hydroacoustic Search and various spotter and float plane fighters found on select ships. Vanguard doesn't have access to any of them and she ends up feeling blind without them. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : More stealth or a spotting consumable other than an aircraft. Alpha and Omega There's not much to say in regards to the skill choices for Vanguard. You can buff up her anti-aircraft firepower if you're super salty about CVs, but on the whole a generic battleship captain build emphasizing fire resistance would serve you better. Start with Priority Target. Take Adrenaline Rush as your second skill. Follow this up with Basics of Survivability at the third tier. For your 10th point-skill, choose between Concealment Expert and Fire Prevention with your 14th point-skill, take the alternative. With your remaining 5 points to spend, customize as you will. Advanced Fire Training will serve you well if you want a little more teeth to your AA guns -- especially when paired with AA Guns Modification 2 from your upgrades. For your remaining 1pt, take either Preventative Maintenance or Expert Loader. Alternatively, you can mix and match between Superintendent, Expert Marksman, Jack of All Trades and High Alert. Keep those tier 1 skills in mind as filler. Final Evaluation She has two main flaws and only two: Her citadel sits high over the water and her fire arcs suck. If you can mitigate these two weaknesses, this boat is amazing. She's been padded with all of the perks possible to compensate for these challenges. If you can't mitigate them, or you find it frustrating, Vanguard is a steaming pile of doo. "The second coming of Warspite" has such a nice ring to it. So many of us were hoping that the Royal Navy battleship line would have borrowed heavily from Warspite's game design -- namely her gun's precision, sluggish gun handling, good agility and improved heals. Instead we got a pack of flame throwers with cloaking devices and portable dry-docks. Complaining about what became of the Royal Navy battleships is so 2017, though. I had pinned my new hopes that Vanguard would be my baebote #2, echoing a lot of what made Warspite great. She almost got there which is pretty surprising. But let's not sugarcoat things -- Vanguard fell short of the mark. This isn't a tier VIII Warspite. So is Vanguard "good"? Well, yes. Yes, she is. However, there's a big ol' butt attached. She's good but she's also potentially frustrating as all get out. I've grumbled enough about her fire arcs. This is a personal pet peeve of mine, if you can't tell. This right here is what would relegated Vanguard to a port-queen for me. For others, her exposed citadel is going to be a big no-no. Why play a battleship that can get her machine spaces easily blown out when you could play something similar that doesn't have to put up with that nonsense? Her inability to overmatch select heavy cruisers will be a turn-off for others. It will keep her from being a contender in competitive play because of it. Finally, her longer AP fuse timer gives her an increased chance of overpenetrations. There's few things as heart breaking as lining up that perfect shot on a cruiser only to watch your shells sail clean through, inflicting minimal damage. One of the ways a premium ship can get in my bad books is by forcing a player to take extra steps to accomplish the same task as other vessels. Vanguard ticks this box. If Famous and HIstorical Monarch can do what Vanguard does and with less frustration, why bother picking up Vanguard? If the comparison to Monarch is bringing you pause, good. The two ships have very similar play styles with the tech tree ship being idiot-proof. I think this is perhaps the most damning thing that could be said about Vanguard: like Monarch, she's a little dull. Thankfully, Vanguard does borrow just enough from Warspite to spare her being called the second coming of the King George V that never was. I'm just not sure it's enough to redeem the ship in my eyes. Her perks are compelling, but it keeps coming back to those frustrating elements for me. I suppose that says it all right there. Know thyself. If those elements seem like turn-offs to you, then stay away. Otherwise, she'll do you no wrong. Would I Recommend? Vanguard acted as the gatekeeper to the initial offering of HMS Dreadnought. If you wanted the latter you had to also buy the former. Make sure you weigh the merits of both ships before pulling the trigger on a purchase like that. PVE Battles How well does the ship maintain profitability in Co-Op modes and how does she fare against bots? Yes. Bots are dumb. Battleships vs bots is always a good fit. Random Battle Grinding: This includes training captains, collecting free experience, earning credits and collecting signal flags from achievements. No. You are absolutely spoiled rotten for choice when it comes to Royal Navy premium battleships. Warspite, Hood, Nelson, Duke of York and Dreadnought are all on offer. Vanguard does have the advantage of being the highest tier, and thus potentially making the most bank, but you could do almost as well for yourself in most of the others. (I can't believe I'm recommending Duke of York as a reasonable alternative...) For Competitive Gaming: Competitive Gaming includes Ranked Battles and other skill-based tournaments. This also includes stat-padding. No. Get yourself Massachusetts or Alabama instead. For Collectors: If you enjoy ship history or possessing rare ships, this section is for you. Yes. She's the last Royal Navy battleship ever -- built in steel and she's drop dead gorgeous. For Fun Factor: Bottom line: Is the ship fun to play? No. I didn't find her fun to play. However, that's because I'm a whiner when it comes to firing arcs. Maybe your own mileage will be different. What’s the Final Verdict? How would the ship rate on oh-so scientific, not-sarcastic at all, Angry YouTuber scale of Garbage – Meh – Gud – Overpowered? GARBAGE– I hate it! Mehbote – An average ship. Probably forgettable. Gudbote – The best thing ever. Totally not overpowered because I like padding my stats in it. OVERPOWERED – I hate playing against it! In Conclusion It's only a week late. That's unfortunately going to be the status quo going forward as I perpetually play catch-up with releases. Since Dreadnought and Vanguard were ninja-announced last week, Bourgogne has been finalized. In addition Charleston was released without any warning, so there are three new reviews in the queue. What's more, the Black Friday ships, Massachusetts, Tirpitz, Atago and Asashio are on their way out. While Tirpitz and Massachusetts' reviews are still reasonably up to date, the changes to the latter two could warrant a revisit. Given the limited access I'm going to have with Bourgogne, I'll probably be prioritizing that one as my next review unless something else comes up. Thank you all for reading. Thank you very much to everyone that supports me on Patreon for helping me produce this content. Appendix Armour penetration data was pulled from two sites: http://proships.ru/stat/ships/ https://mustanghx.github.io/ship_ap_calculator/
  7. The following is a PREVIEW of the upcoming release of Hood, a ship Wargaming very kindly provided me. This is the second version of the ship seen during testing and her stats are current as of May 15th, 2017. However, the statistics and performance discussed here are still being evaluated by Wargaming's developers and do not necessarily represent how the ship will appear when released. Error 404: Detonation joke not found. Quick Summary: A large, very fast, if under armed battleship with curious AA mechanics.Cost: Undisclosed at this time.Patch and Date Written: 0.6.4 to April 22nd, 2017 to May 15th, 2017. Closest in-Game Contemporary Kongo, tier 5 Japanese BattleshipDegree of Similarity: Clone / Sister-Ship / Related Class / Similar Role / Unique Are you as surprises as I am that Warspite isn't listed here? Hood reminds me very much of some of the early days of playing Kongo, when she was one of only two tier 5 battleships. Hood, like Kongo, has speed but not the firepower. She has good protection when angled but she falls apart when she's caught out of position. When top tier, she's a great ship. When she's not, she feels lackluster -- more so than some other battleships. PROs Excellent fire angles on her main battery. Guns are very accurate at all ranges with tight horizontal and vertical dispersion and 1.8 sigma. Improved fuse timers and better auto-ricochet angles makes her well suited to damaging even evasive cruisers. Very fast with a top speed of 32.0 knots. Good rudder shift time of 13.4s. Deceptively agile for her size with a turning rate of over 4º per second. She's the first Battleship with a (albeit limited) Defensive Fire consumable. Possesses an improved version of the Repair Party consumable, queuing up to 60% of penetration damage received. CONs Hood is a very large target with an enormous citadel. Small main armament of eight 381mm rifles leading to poor penetration, alpha strike and DPM. Small and poorly positioned secondary gun battery with limited arcs of fire. Defensive Fire consumable only affects her Anti-Aircraft Rockets. Rocket AA mounts are incredibly fragile and small in number with only 200hp each and are easily knocked out by single HE hits. No Royal Navy Battleships to train Captains for (yet). Where did the last month go? Hood has had a long development cycle -- at least it's felt very long because of all of that testing I was doing. I haven't spent this much time, energy and focus on a single review since Saipan. The ship had two major iterations during the testing period and rather than release one for each, I've held off on publishing while I waited for the ship to finalize. Instead, I spent time trying to learn everything I could about the ship, including testing her shell dispersion patterns, acceleration rates and even the vulnerability of her citadel and magazines. Despite holding off as long as I have, Hood still isn't finalized. Changes may still be coming, but on the eve of her release, I am pulling the trigger to give you all a glimpse of the ship that was. I present the Mighty Hood. OptionsHMS Hood is the first Battleship to have access to the Defensive Fire consumable. This version of Defensive Fire is special, affecting only her short-ranged Anti-Aircraft Rocket mounts to a pronounced degree, lasts 60s and comes with three charges standard. In addition, Hood has a special Repair Party consumable. It may heal up to 60% of all penetration damage done by all sources instead of just 50%, similar to that of HMS Warspite. It still only recovers a maximum of 14% of Hood's HP over 28 seconds like normal battleships, unlike Warspite which recovers 16.8% per charge. Consumables: Damage Control Party Repair Party Defensive Fire Module Upgrades: Four slots, standard British Battleship options Premium Camouflage: Tier 6+ Standard. This provides 50% bonus experience gains, 3% reduction in surface detection and 4% reduction in enemy accuracy. During the Hunt the Bismarck campaign, two additional camouflage patterns will become available through completing Mission #6. The exact bonuses they provide were not disclosed by the time this was published. For upgrades, Hood should equip the following modules: In her first slot, take Main Armaments Modification 1. You're going to take a lot of hits in Hood and because of the aggressive angles you'll be taking, many of them will strike your forward turrets and barbettes. This will help keep your guns in action against such punishment. If you're planning on specializing her anti-aircraft armament, you should consider Auxiliary Armaments Modification 1 to increase the survivability of your rocket-mounts. In the second slot, you have two interesting choices. Optimally, taking Aiming Systems Modification 1 is best. This will tighten her shell groupings, especially at range, while simultaneously providing a slight increase to the range of her secondary gun batteries. Alternatively, you can seek to maximize her AA power by taking AA Guns Modification 2. This latter choice will not make her a threat to enemy aircraft carriers but it will provide some functionality with her Defensive Fire consumable but only if paired with Advanced Fire Training, so keep this in mind. In your third slot, Damage Control System Modification 1 is your best choice. This will increase her torpedo damage reduction from 16% to 18% And in your last slot, you have a choice of either Steering Gears Modification 2 or Damage Control System Modification 2. Take the latter if you're afraid of fire, though she's not any more flammable than other tier 7 Battleships. Firepower Primary Battery: Eight 381mm rifles in 4x2 turrets in an A-B-X-Y superfiring configuration. Secondary Battery: Fourteen 102mm rifles in 7x2 turrets with three down each side behind the funnels and the last mounted rearward on the center line. Let's start with the bad news: Hood doesn't have very good weapon systems. Her main battery lacks penetration and her secondaries are horribly placed. These elements really hold the ship back from being truly excellent. Hood has fewer secondary guns than Colorado and they're largely placed towards the rear half of the ship..This creates large blind spots forward preventing them from being brought to bear when on the attack until a target is 35º off her bow. More often than not you will only have one or two turrets firing at most. While they may pick up the occasional low-health kill, it would be a serious mistake to rely upon these weapons or the specialize into improving their performance. Hood's 381mm/42 MkII guns superficially resemble those off Warspite. In fact, looking at their stats in port, you would have a hard time finding much in the way of difference between the two ship's guns beyond range and rate of rotation. It's within her hidden stats, namely shell normalization, AP fuse timers and penetration that Hood steps further away from Warspite. Hood's penetration values are bad. To compensate for this, Wargaming made Hood better at avoiding ricochets and damaging lightly armoured targets. The exact changes are as follows: Hood shells auto-ricochet at 67.5º instead of 60º like Warspite. With the notable exception of Hood, all Battleship shells that do not overmatch the thickness of armour will auto-ricochet if they strike a shell angled less than 30º to the horizontal regardless of the relative penetration power of a given shell. This value is common in most warships in the game with a few notable exceptions -- the most common being the high tier American Heavy Cruisers. Hood's shells will not auto-ricochet unless they strike at an acute angle of less than 22.5º to the horizontal. This is designed to make Hood more likely to penetrate vessels taking an aggressive bow-on attack posture and to ensure she has fewer shells that careen off of funny angles of turret faces and the like. Note, that this does not provide any bonus value to penetration or normalization. An armour plate at the acute angle of 31º to the horizontal effectively doubles its relative thickness so while a shell might not ricochet from the angle of impact, it may still shatter against the relative thickness of the plate it encounters from a lack of penetration power. Hood has faster fuse-timers at 0.015s instead of Warspite's 0.033s. An AP shell's fuse arms by passing through a sufficiently thick piece of steel plate or striking a structural divide between ships sections. After a small delay, the shell detonates. For most ships with 330mm guns and larger, this fuse delay is set at 0.033s while those of a smaller caliber have 0.01s delay. The shortened delay timer makes it more likely that her shells will explode inside a target -- particularly narrower sections of a ship, such as the extremities battleships or the broadside of light cruisers at close range. However, the fuses still only arm when they strike thick enough metal so this doesn't guarantee that they will penetrate soft skinned ships like destroyers and French cruisers. Hood's fuses need to strike a plate 64mm thick (or a structural divide) in order to arm. Striking at the maximum angle, Hood would need to hit a minimum 25mm steel plate in order to arm in this manner, so it's still very possible to see over penetrations from a broad range of targets. Hood's accuracy is slightly worse than Warspite's with 1.8 sigma instead of 2.0 sigma. While Hood's shell grouping aren't as tight as those of Warspite, she's still a Royal Navy Battleship which brings an accuracy perk. These vessels have some of the tightest horizontal and vertical dispersion in among the current dreadnoughts. Due to the lower shell velocity of her 381mm guns, the overall dispersion area per shot is comparably less than that to any other nation. This does mean that you can drop some rather accurate shells on unsuspecting targets. Aim well and pick your targets right and Hood can still perform. Without a target lock, the shell dispersion patterns seen here are roughly double what would be seen when firing at enemy ships. There is approximately 350m between nav buoys. Shells are traveling from right to left. Hood has approximately 7% worse penetration than Warspite at all ranges. It's the drop in penetration power that's telling and largely dictates why her guns have sub-standard performance. She has less penetration power at 10km than Gneisenau has at 15km. Due to her lower shell velocity, her volleys come in at a higher angle than other battleships which further increases the relative thickness of plate against which it strikes. Thus even armour you might assume Hood possesses enough raw penetration to best can end up shattering her shells. At ranges greater than 12km, you can't expect Hood to reliably penetrate the belt armour of any enemy battleship you come across. Instead, aim a little higher and try and hammer the upper hull or superstructure. Looking back at port values, two statistics should stand out: range and gun rotation. On paper, Hood has the second lowest range of any of the tier 7 Battleships, though it pays to keep in mind that Colorado can boost her reach from 17.1km up to 19.9km with her Artillery Plotting Room 1 upgrade. Unfortunately for Hood, she doesn't have access to the same. Hood's 18.6km reach will often feel insufficient, especially when she gets up-tiered. Unlike Warspite, she doesn't have access to a Spotter Aircraft to temporarily boost her range, functionally giving her less maximum range than her tier 6 cousin. All of Hood's main battery drawbacks could be done away with if she was a good brawler. Her penetration woes would fall away. Range wouldn't be an issue. This would really exemplify the strengths of her improved auto-ricochet angles and the decreased shell fuse timer. In truth, she does have some qualities that would make her a good medium to short range brawler, such as her agility and protection scheme (see below for more on that). On top of this, her gun angles are excellent. Her #4 turret can engage enemies 30º off her bow and her #3 can do so with enemies at 31º. If only she had decent secondaries or working torpedo launchers to back them up. So while Hood has arguably the worst guns (both primary and secondary) at her tier, they're not without their merits. While their performance will not do players any favours, proper target selection and aim can go a long way towards mitigating their drawbacks. What about her gun Rotation? At the time of writing this, HMS Hood had a 3º per second main battery rotation speed -- 60s for 180º turn which is pretty terrible. Unconfirmed rumours had mentioned that Hood's turret rotation would be buffed up to 5º per second before release. I don't like to write my reviews based on rumours, especially not ones Wargaming themselves cannot confirm or deny. As it stands, with her original traverse rate, this is another drawback to her weapons, albeit a minor one. Her excellent firing arcs makes it very easy to mitigate this issue by locking the rear turrets in an 'over the shoulder' position and just apply small touches of rudder to unmask them before slipping back into a more aggressive, not-quite bow on stance to emphasize the strengths of her armour once more. Should Hood receive this turret rotation buff, this would give her some of the fastest turning turrets among Battleships in the game -- just behind the quick turning rates of Friedrich der Große and on par with the likes of Bismarck and Dunkerque. This will again bring up the question of brawling with Hood and ... while possible, it's still a very dangerous game to play, especially without good backup weaponry in the form of torpedoes or awesome secondaries. Still, it might be the play to make in select circumstances, but I wouldn't rely on it. Summary: The gimmicks of shortened fuses and improved auto-ricochet angles are nice and all, but they don't prop up what are ultimately the weakest guns at their tier. Hood is under-armed with low DPM, low penetration and low range. Her secondary's suck moose balls. Her accuracy is good, though, being as good as (or better) than some of the 2.0 sigma warships at her tier grace of the tighter British dispersion. Manoeuvrability Top Speed: 32.0 knotsTurning Radius: 910mRudder Shift: 13.4s Turn Rate: 4.08º per second HMS Hood's agility is a story of contrasts. She's very fast, but she takes a long time to get up to speed. She has an enormous turning circle, yet she can change her heading very quickly for a ship of her size. It's all too easy to dismiss Hood's handling as "bad" -- especially with her turning circle of 910m. This is the worst at her tier, and by a significant margin. While it's true that requires a lot of room to turn around, the rate at which she does turn is surprisingly fast for her size. Hood manages just shy of 4.1º per second in a turn grace of her high speed. This is well ahead of Nagato (3.7º per second) however it falls short of all of the other tier 7 battleships. This still puts her ahead of ships with smaller turning circles, like North Carolina and Arizona. So while Hood's ability to turn isn't "good", it's not terrible either. She'll surprise many opponents with how quickly she changes her heading or how aptly she can wiggle and dodge. Her rudder shift time can be dropped down to a mere 10.7s which only adds to her responsiveness. The only downside to this agility is that during play testing, she was out turning her turrets and by quite a bit. If Hood has a real shortfall it's in her acceleration. Compared to her closest contemporary, Gneisenau, she's slower in the turn (23.9 knots versus 24.1 knots) and she takes longer to accelerate to full speed from a dead stop (73s versus 65s). The difference between the two in manoeuvres is more telling -- Gneisenau recovers from deceleration faster, reaching her full speed again within 30s while Hood needs 35s. This can limit Hood's ability to dictate engagement ranges unless she sails in a straight line. Indeed, the strength of her high top speed -- as fast as or faster than any other Battleship she'll encounter short of the Iowa-class -- is predicated by sailing on a straight line course. Pray there are no torpedo armed destroyers able to draw a bead on her. If there's room to pull this off, she can effectively kite opponents that attempt to give chase. Even destroyers (particularly the slower IJN Destroyers) will struggle to keep pace with Hood when she has a mind of opening up the distance. This has the added benefit of pointing her badly positioned secondaries at whatever is pursuing her. On the attack, Hood can dominate slower Battleships and unwary cruisers, using her speed and handling to bow in, angle against incoming fire and close into her own optimal firing range while. Cruisers cannot comfortably outpace her without sailing in a straight line and Hood will punish them for moving predictably. In the latter stages of a match, Hood can really make all of the difference, with her high speed allowing her to power from one flank to the other and address the needs of her team mates. This even makes up for some of the disparity of her range. High speed should never be discounted -- it's an incredibly powerful asset. Finally, Hood's manoeuvrability combines with her excellent firing arcs of her guns and her fast rudder shift. It's quite easy to keep the ship heavily angled, touch the rudder to unmask turrets 3 and 4, fire and then touch the rudder back to return to a defensive stance. When she elects to take a brawling stance, her speed and handling doesn't let her down. Om nom nom, Atlanta. Hood has the speed to chase down many cruisers, especially if they don't turn tail and run flat out. DurabilityHit Points: 67,700Maximum Protection: 25mm + 305mm + 40mm Min Bow & Deck Armour: 25mmTorpedo Damage Reduction: 16% Hood's reputation for fragility precedes her, so it may be a bit of a tough sell for me to declare that she's rather well protected. There's some obvious points to get out of the way -- she's not German so her citadel can be penetrated. She's also tier 7 and not tier 8, so this hamstrings her with her tier mate's 25mm bow and stern armour which can be overmatched by 380mm guns or larger. But overall, she's not an especially fragile battleship. Hood's citadel protection over her machine spaces is comparable to Nagato's, but she rides much lower in the water. This fully immerses her citadel beneath the waterline, which is an immediate plus. The downside is that this also immerses most of her belt armour, leaving only a bacon-thin stripe over the water's surface. Without angling, the large slab sides of the ship are vulnerable to letting in AP penetrations from even cruiser-caliber guns, so be careful about giving up her flanks. Her armour scheme works best at medium to close ranges where she can turn in against incoming firepower. Like all ships with turtlebacks, Hood has to be especially wary of long range fire. Most of the citadel damage I've taken has come from long range shell strikes from distances greater than 15km. Giving up your flush broadside is also asking to have your machine spaces blown out. Her vulnerabilities lie primarily with her turrets and barbettes which aren't as well protected as her contemporaries, leaving them vulnerable to direct fire. It's quite common for these guns to get temporarily disabled, so Main Armaments Modification 1 is a sound investment. Preventative Maintenance on your ship's Commander wouldn't be remiss either. It's against high explosive fire that Hood is surprisingly adept. She shares the usual vulnerabilities of her superstructure to all gun calibers and her bows and stern can be easily damaged by 152mm guns or larger. However, like the German Battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, amidships, her deck is too thick for even heavy cruiser HE shells to damage. Similarly, above her armoured belt, her plate never gets thin enough for high explosive to damage either, being immune to everything up to and including Battleship caliber HE shells. Hood is highly vulnerable to torpedoes, however. Her long keel presents an ideal target for broadside spreads. Her propensity to want to sail in straight lines to maximize speed can set her up for disaster, so keeping a wary eye on the minimap is necessary to avoid unwelcome surprises. Concealment & Camouflage Base Surface Detection Range: 16.2km Air Detection Range: 13.9 km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 13.5km Main Battery Range: 18.6km Hood is a large ship and she understandably has a rather large surface detection range. It's perhaps a surprise that it's not the worst at her tier. She sits comfortably in the middle -- outdone by 500m when compared to the commerce raiders Scharnhorst and Gneisenau but ahead of Colorado by the same margin and with nearly a full kilometer's advantage over Nagato. This happy middle ground evaporates when her aerial detection is concerned -- she has the largest surface detection by a large margin. You're not sneaking up on anything in Hood. Even if you specialize in concealment, you're still going to be sniffed out from the air at a range of 11.9km and from the surface at 13.5km. This can put a real hurt on her efforts to take up flanking positions, as she's more visible than most of the American and German Battleships (especially when they're higher tier and rigged for concealment) and she stands little chance of catching a cruiser off guard. What really hurts Hood's concealment is that without allies, she has to do her own spotting. She has no access to Hydro, Radar or some kind of catapult aircraft to give her early warning about another ship's approach through concealment or obstacles. So not only is a she a big ship, she's also a blind big ship. Destroyers can approach her confident that she won't spot them early and that her secondaries are ill placed to fend them off. This allows Hood to be out played by another ship that can control vision. Were it not for Hood's speed, she might be surrendering all initiative to the enemy because of this deficit. I ran lots (and lots, and lots) of tests of Hood's anti-aircraft ability, both against bots and against volunteers like Lert. The more heavily specialized she became, the more more brutal her AA power became under the Defensive Fire consumable. It's almost meme-worthy, but don't swallow the hype wholesale. Anti-Aircraft Defense AA Battery Calibers: 178mm / 102mm / 40mm / 12.7mmAA Umbrella Ranges: 1.5km / 5.0km / 2.5km / 1.2kmAA DPS per Aura: 50 / 56 / 69 / 8 Much ado will be made about HMS Hood's anti-aircraft defenses. Let's get this out of the way before we go any further: Hood is selfish. Whatever you feel about the final values of Hood's AA power, she isn't designed around fleet-defense. Her dual purpose, 102mm guns may have the reach but can only do so much to help to a beleaguered ally, even when fully upgraded. Instead, Hood's flak is meant to selfishly protect herself from enemy air attack. The only redeemable quality of Hood's anti-aircraft defenses comes solely from her two unique features -- her anti aircraft rockets and her Defensive Fire consumable. On the surface, her rockets are pretty lackluster too. She has five mounts, each adding 10dps to the collective whole which isn't spectacular. Worse, they have only a 1.5km range. Stock, they are utterly incapable of engaging enemy torpedo planes before they make their drop. At best, they can engage enemy dive bombers on their final attack run. Worse, her Defensive Fire consumable only affects these rocket mounts, meaning that the disruption effect provided by this consumable only touches planes that have slipped within this 1.5km window. Clearly, we're not off to a great start. Thankfully, it gets better. While Defensive Fire is limited to her rocket mounts it does have two buffs over the standard consumable. Instead of buffing her DPS by a factor of three for forty seconds, Hood's Defensive Fire lasts sixty seconds. And, the DPS of her rockets is buffed twenty-five times. Yes, you read that right: Twenty-five times. Without any other bonuses, Hood's rockets generate an average of 1,250 DPS for sixty seconds. To put this in perspective, Minotaur, the tier 10 British cruiser that's renowned for her anti-aircraft firepower, generates a total of 494 DPS stock. Anything that wanders into the rocket's aura is going to take heavy casualties, but this won't be enough to do more than maul most air groups. Most carriers will be able to stomach such losses if it means being able to drop ordnance. So while Hood might cause a few casualties, stock she's not going to scare anyone off. This changes if you choose to upgrade heavily into anti-aircraft defense. Taking the AA Guns Modification 2 upgrade in combination with Advanced Fire Training on your commander will nudge up your rocket's range to 2.2km. This range may not feel like much but it's significant. First, it gives your rockets more time to engage dive bombers. Second, this range will also catch torpedo planes -- sometimes before they drop but almost always after they drop. So while this will again make attacking Hood expensive, range boosts alone will not discourage carriers from engaging her. Boosting her DPS will. With the Captain Skills Basic Fire Training and Manual Fire Control for AA Guns, Hood's rocket DPS spikes up over 3,000dps. This is the equivalent of two Montana-class Battleships specialized for anti-aircraft firepower firing in tandem at the same target. In short, nothing survives inside of 2.2km. Attack plane squadrons melt like they hit a wall. Carrier players have no reaction time to recover aircraft that slip inside this barrier and the only answer is to either wait out the consumable or launch torpedoes at very long range. Torpedo planes will always be Hood's bane, though. While it is possible to annihilate a poorly managed torpedo bomber wave before they drop, usually they will get at least a few fish into the water. Hood's large size and huge turning circle does make dodging fish challenging (though not impossible with her good turning speed), so it's likely she will take at least some damage from a concerted attack. However, her AA defense does have an Achilles Heel. The weakness in her AA defense is the survivability of her rocket mounts. Though they count as a large-caliber weapon, they do not have the protection of large caliber guns. Hood's rocket AA mounts have the same hit point totals as small and medium caliber AA Guns -- a mere 200hp as opposed to t he 800hp of dual-purpose mounts. Using Auxillary Armaments Modification 1 will double this to 400hp, but this will only keep her safe from 130mm HE rounds -- nothing bigger. This makes them exceedingly vulnerable to cruiser fire and it''s very unlikely that her defenses will be intact once she's taken even a modest amount of high explosive damage. Each mount lost cuts her heavy-hitting AA power by one fifth so it doesn't take much to neutralize her anti-aircraft aura to a pittance. This makes a heavy investment into AA firepower seem foolish as it can be largely dismantled even from light damage from surface vessels. When an enemy carrier faces a Hood, the question will always be: "Is it worth engaging her?" The truest test will always be to see at what range Hood's batteries engage those aircraft. If her guns remain silent at 7km or even 6km, then she's probably a safe target for torpedo planes. Dive Bombers should stay away until Hood is on half health or less. Braving attack runs on a specialized and weary Hood will only empty out your hangar for very little gains. Personally, I found using a fully specialized AA Captain hilarious. The comments from carrier players when everything died before dropping their warheads was always so satisfying. Proper management of her anti-aircraft guns was key, including disabling her AA guns to lure planes in and shutting them off again after an attack run to accelerate the reset timer on her Defensive Fire. However, let's be clear: It's a heavy investment for what amounts to little gains in the majority of your battles. It hinges on:a.) Matchmaker placing you in a game with enemy carriers...b.) ...that are intent on trying to attack you with their planes...c.) ...before enemy surface ships destroy your AA rocket mounts. If this seems incredibly specific and unlikely, you're not mistaken. The skill points and modules are likely be better spent elsewhere. But there's no denying the joy of annihilating enemy aircraft. How to be MightyThere are two main Commander builds to consider for Hood. Anti-Aircraft Build, to maximize the defensive potential of Hood's hilarious AA mechanics. A conservative, defensive build to stress concealment and fire damage mitigation. The core skills you'll want for both Hood builds starts with Priority Target (1pt) followed by Adrenaline Rush (2pts) to help prop up her awful DPM totals. From here, the paths of the two builds diverge greatly. The anti-aircraft build requires the use of Basic Fire Training (3pts) and a rush to get Advanced Fire Training (4pts) as soon as possible. This last skill should be combined with the AA Guns Modification 2 upgrade to push the range of her rockets out to 2.2km. The next skill to grab is Manual Fire Control for AA Guns (4pts). It's highly recommend you take Superintendent (3pts) as a follow up to add another charge to your Defensive Fire consumable. This will give you a maximum of 5 charges. This will leave you with 2pts remaining to be placed where you prefer. Expert Marksman (2pts) or High Alert (2pts) are the best choices. The defensive build for Hood should look familiar to veterans of battleships and stresses reducing the reset timers of consumables while mitigating the risks of fire. After taking the first two skills listed above, grab Basics of Survivability (3pts), then Concealment Expert (4pts) to get your surface detection range down. Next, you have a choice. I would put points into Superintendent (3pts) for the extra charge of her Repair Party, High Alert (2pts) and Vigilance (3pts) with the final point going towards Preventative Maintenance (1pt). Alternatively, drop the last two skills for Fire Prevention (4pts) instead for those that really hate fires. It's possible to mix and match skills from both builds to create a hybrid. Advanced Fire Training is the key skill to make the anti-aircraft build work, provided it's combined with AA Guns Modification 2. You may not kill every plane this way, but at least you can make it expensive for CVs to engage you. "Hood has Defensive Fire? That would have been nice to know," said a Taiho Captain after this attack run. Hood's AA couldn't prevent the drop of all three stacked torpedo squadrons, but it could shoot most of them down, making attacks like this prohibitively expensive. Overall Impressions Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / Challenging / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / High / Extreme Hood is a battleship -- and a battleship with good durability and accurate guns which makes her rather forgiving on the surface. However, she's not idiot proof like the low tier German Battleships, nor will she do you any favours where dealing damage is concerned. One of the main complaints about her will forever be her guns which simply don't hit hard enough without compensations to the volume of fire. In the hands of an expert player, Hood will tick all of the same boxes that Dunkerque and Iowa do. She's a fast, flanking Battleship that can really cause a lot of headaches to the enemy. Hood is one of the best ships out there for denying a flank to enemy cruisers and dreadnoughts by being annoying and hard to kill. Her speed lets her control the engagement and delay even a hard push by tanking far more damage than anyone expects her capable. Her carrying potential is limited by her small main battery and awful secondaries. Mouse's Summary: Held back by her weapons. Hood really makes you work for every scrap of damage done. Her anti-aircraft armament is a fun gimmick. Not very practical, but a lot of fun. Hood is a lot tougher than her historical reputation would suggest. Never underestimate the value of her speed. I was (not-so secretly) hoping Hood was going to be a 30-knot, faster-firing version of HMS Warspite: Fast. Agile. Good DPM for her tier. Tough as nails if played right but uncompromising if mishandled and absolutely brutal in a close range fight if push comes to shove. That's not what Hood ended up being and admittedly, it took me a little while to get over my disappointment of not being able to replace my favourite ship with something better. It's almost like Wargaming didn't want to give a Royal Navy fangirl a(nother) super-overpowered British boat. Harumph. Now, those unrealistic expectations aside, I had a lot of fun play testing Hood. I put this ship through her paces. I mapped her shell fall patterns. I drag raced her against the other tier 7 Battleships to check her acceleration and put her through my usual tests to find her rotation speed. I even went head to head with iChase's Nagato in a trio of one-versus-one duels in the original build of Hood. We really hammered out the strengths and weaknesses of the ship in those engagements. It made a few lessons abundantly clear: Her speed is amazing. She's painfully blind with no aircraft or spotting consumable. Her guns may not hit hard, but they hit reliably and the damage she can do is not insignificant if you aim well. Brawling is largely a mistake unless it's to finish off a low health and vulnerable foe, then it can be amazingly decisive. She's also a lot tougher than she looks (though she'll still get her citadel blown out), and her anti-aircraft armament is hilarious. I want to be able to say clearly how I think Hood is going to perform in the community at large. I think people will really love her durability and handling. I do think that her gun performance is going to hold her back from topping those vaunted damage charts everyone hovers over as the yardstick for a successful boat... however, her survivability and speed might let her snatch up a few extra scraps of damage that might be otherwise denied to a Nagato or Colorado. I don't think anyone will be disappointed to see HMS Hood on their team -- in fact, they may prefer her there over the presence of a Colorado. I don't think she will displace the Scharnhorst-sisters as some of the best ships at their tier. Finally, Hood isn't overpowered. I do think she'll polarize players though. You'll love her quirks or you'll get turned off right away by her guns. So while I didn't get a better, faster Warspite, I did get to play something different and ultimately enjoyable. Would I Recommend? It's always fun phrasing recommendations for famous ships. It's understandable that a lot of people will have already made up their minds well in advance -- HMS Hood is just one of those iconic vessels that demands attention. PVE Battles How well does the ship maintain profitability in Co-Op modes and how does she fare against bots? As a Battleship, Hood is well suited to bullying bots and is a good choice for PVE Battles. She has an enormous hit point pool which keeps her low on the bot's priority list and her AA power and agility is more than sufficient to avoid hits from CV auto-drops. Her repair costs sit at 26,775 credits with 90 credits spent per shell fired. However, she won't make bank. A typical 400 base experience game will net about 50,000 credits after expenses without a premium account. Random Battle Grinding This includes training captains, collecting free experience, earning credits and collecting signal flags from achievements. While I do feel that Warspite is the better Battleship trainer between the two, Hood isn't a bad ship. If you need only one Royal Navy Battleship trainer, I would recommend the former -- she'll be more cost effective. However, taken on her own merits, Hood is a good ship for grinding in Random Battles. For Competitive Gaming:Competitive Gaming includes Ranked Battles and other skill-based tournaments. This also includes stat-padding. It's hard to recommend Hood for competitive gaming. While she would enjoy relative immunity from enemy CV predations, she's just too blind and too under armed to be as strong a contender as Nagato, Scharnhorst or Gneisenau. For Collectors:If you enjoy ship history or possessing rare ships, this section is for you. Do I seriously need to fill this section out? For Fun Factor:Bottom line: Is the ship fun to play? Yep. I enjoyed my time with her. Although, I admit that the "look out for Bismarck" jokes got pretty old after a while. What's the Final Verdict?How would the ship rate on an Angry YouTuber scale of Garbage - Meh - Gud - Overpowered? GARBAGE - Grossly uncompetitive and badly in need of buffs.Mehbote - Average ship. Has strengths and weaknesses. Doesn't need buffs to be viable, but certainly not advantageous.Gudbote - A strong ship that has obvious competitive strengths and unique features that make it very appealing.OVERPOWERED - A ship with very clear advantages over all of its competitors and unbalancing the game with its inclusion. I still want one.
  8. Grand_Admiral_Murrel

    [WIP] RN Battlecruiser Arc

    Been doing some research, and kinda started wondering why the Royal Navy couldn't stand to have a second branch of battleships in-game. Of course, they'd have to be different from the current line to be attractive, so why not have a battlecruiser line? There is no shortage of battlecruisers built by the royal navy; a new arc could likely start as early as tier 3, since the first battlecruisers were laid down at the same time as HMS Dreadnought. I would appreciate it if other players could recommend ships they'd like to see, if this new branch were to materialize in the near future. As battlecruisers (and not battleships), they would feature large calibre guns typically found on battleships, but sacrifice some armour for a speed advantage. As a side note, it would be nice to have Royal Navy battleships that don't sling OP HE all the time, and without an absurd repair party. Instead, I propose better AP (or at least standard compared to other nations) and not-so-OP HE. Also, many of the ships I have named carried some form of torpedo armament. Might be interesting (and make sense) for these to b the standard Royal Navy torpedo launchers, which can launch single torpedoes. The stats provided are historically accurate *cough*, so bear with me. All proposed HP values were calculated using player Fr05ty's tried and true formulas, which he graciously provided. In my work, I noticed that there seems to be a 12% increase in HP for the existing British battleships. This change has not been accounted for in the numbers I offer below. Designs yet to consider: https://warshipprojects.wordpress.com/2017/07/03/washington-cherrytrees-2/ https://warshipprojects.wordpress.com/2017/09/25/washington-cherrytrees-2-ii/ https://warshipprojects.wordpress.com/2017/09/27/washington-cherry-trees-ii-part-3/ I3 J3 K2, K3 L1 L2, L3 M2 M3 N3 X4 Design Y Design B, C1, C2, D Design A Design T1 LII LIII Battlecruisers K --> A Battleships L --> Z J3, I3, H3a, H3b, H3c – battlecruisers all-in; Nov.-Dec. 1920 O3 F2, F3 Here are my ideas for potential ships, by tier: TIER III Invincible class (HMS Invincible, HMS Inflexible, HMS Indomitable) Main armament: 4x2 305 mm guns 2x2 450 mm torpedo tubes (one on each side, amidships) 1x1 450 mm torpedo tube (stern-mounted) Secondary armament: 16x1 102 mm guns Speed: 25 knots (ridiculous speed at tier 3, let alone tier 4) Displacement: 21,084 tonnes HP: 35,700 (vs Bellerophon at 38,100) TIER IV Indefatigable class (HMS Indefatigable, HMS New Zealand, HMAS Australia*) Main armament: 4x2 305 mm guns Speed: 25 knots Displacement: 22,846 HP: 37,800 (vs Orion at 42,700) This ship is far below the average 43,900 of other tier 4 ships, and therefore would need to be buffed. HMS Neptune (below) - very similar to Imperial Germany's Kaiser class... nothing special in my opinion. Please let me know if there is any disagreement in the comments below. Premium... maybe? Succeeded by very similar Colossus class dreadnought (only real difference being more torpedoes... but who doesn't love a battleship armed with torpedoes?). TIER V Lion class (HMS Lion, HMS Princess Royal) - As there exists a Lion in-game, the latter name would be better Main armament: 4x2 343 mm guns Speed: 28 knots HP: 47,200 (current maximum HP at tier 4 is 46,400, with the average at 43,920. If this ship were to be used at tier 4, its HP would have to be nerfed moderately. HMS Queen Mary Main armament: 4x2 343 mm guns Speed: 28 knots HMS Tiger Main armament: 4x2 343 mm guns 2x2 533 mm torpedo launchers (one pair amidships on each side) Secondary armament: 12x1 152 mm guns Speed: 28 knots Displacement: 34,332 tonnes HP: 51,400 (vs Iron Duke at 47,100) HMS Canada (aka Almirante Latorre (below), could be the first South American (Chilean) battleship in-game) Main armament: 5x2 356 mm guns 4x 533 mm torpedo tubes Speed: 23 knots HMS Agincourt - unique in that it was armed with 7x 2 305 mm guns and 3x 1 torpedo tubes; this ship has an interesting story, but it isn't truly a battlecruiser (it is a true dreadnought), and therefore might make a very appealing premium ship rather than fitting into this proposed line. TIER VI Renown Class (HMS Renown (below), HMS Repulse) - could be a little OP at tier 6, stats similar to Gneisenau at tier 7 Main armament: 3x2 381 mm guns 2x1 533mm torpedo launchers (mounted in the bow) Secondary armament: 5x3 102 mm guns 2x1 102 mm guns Speed: 31 knots Displacement: 33,265 tonnes (slightly less than the HMS Tiger) HP: 50,130 (vs Queen Elizabeth at 55,300) (Note that this is slightly less than my calculated values for HMS Tiger at tier 5) FOR LOLZ: the Courageous class (HMS Courageous, HMS Glorious, HMS Furious), in particular HMS Furious, which had a grand total of 2x 457 mm guns... this would make an "interesting" premium light cruiser, considering it had the armour of a light cruiser. This thing could lol-pen anything within several tiers, but the number of guns is a "limitation". Personally I wouldn't buy it unless it had a decent reload, and even then... If enough interest arises in these ridiculous ships, I will post their stats, but here's a pic to satisfy your interest: TIER VII Admiral Class (HMS Hood, HMS Anson, HMS Howe, HMS Rodney) Main armament: 4x2 381 mm guns 10x1 torpedo tubes!!! Secondary armament: 12x1 139 mm guns Speed: 32 knots Displacement: 48,191 tonnes (based on Hood's displacement) HP: 67,800 (vs Hood at 67,700) TIER VIII G3 Battlecruisers (paper ships) Main armament: 3x3 406 mm guns 2x2 622 mm torpedo launchers (some serious calibre) Secondary armament: 8x2 152 mm guns Speed: 32 knots Displacement: 55,652 tonnes HP: 76,574 TIER IX *** Ideas welcome Different iteration of G3? Move rear turret closer to stern, faster reload? TIER X N3 Battlecruisers (paper ships) - the ship to rival the Yamato (difference in calibre of 3 mm) Main armament: 3x3 457 mm guns 2x3 (or 2x4) 533 mm torpedo launchers Secondary armament: 8x2 152 mm guns Speed: 30 knots (maybe increased for the tier) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *HMAS Australia would be a good addition to the Commonwealth tech tree Please send me suggestions by replying! Also, here's a link to a very similar topic on the Asia forum: https://forum.worldofwarships.asia/topic/3961-british-royal-navy-and-battlecruisers/
  9. Cossack is a stealthy British gunship destroyer armed with eight 120mm/45 naval rifles and a single bank of four, high-tier torpedoes. She is defined by her good concealment values and awkward firing arcs. Cossack also has access to the Engine Boost consumable while maintaining improved British acceleration and energy preservation. Game play wise, Cossack is very similar to Lightning with an overlap in consumables and commander skill choices. Wargaming has set her price tag at 9,600 doubloons. This is the second Tribal-class destroyer introduced into World of Warships following the release of HMCS Haida earlier this year. She is less remarkable than her sister-ship but that's largely owing to the unforgiving environment in which she plays. Cossack contends with being up-tiered more often than her Canadian counterpart and higher tiered matches are far more radar intensive. Moreover, at tier VII Haida has a defined role -- she's a lolibote-molester. This role is generally lacking among the other tin-cans at tier VII which makes Haida stand out. Cossack doesn't share this same kind of defined specialty. She's more of a generalist scout or gunship -- roles that are replicated by other destroyers at her tier. Thus, Cossack is a workhorse, one gunship among many. She gets the job done in a tough environment which is worth noting, though she is not deserving of any acclaim in this regard. PROS Good DPM performance on her guns and excellent chance at starting fires. Powerful torpedoes for a gunship which may launched individually. Improved engine performance with increased acceleration and energy preservation in a turn while also having access to the Engine Boost consumable. Ridiculous rate of turn, throwing herself about at almost 9.0º/s! Good concealment with a surface detection as low as 5.48km. Access to a long-lasting British Hydroacoustic Search consumable. CONS Poor fire angles on all weapons. Terrible gun ballistics -- worse than American 127mm/38s. Limited to a single torpedo launcher. Her anti-aircraft firepower is effectively non-existent. Poor quality Smoke Generator consumable with short emission time and duration. Overview Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / Challenging / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / High / Extreme Cossack is not a forgiving ship to play. For a novice player, she has many strikes against her. She struggles to do damage, hamstrung with restrictive fire sectors on all of her weapons and poor performing guns. A deep skill build is necessary to allow her to do direct damage with her artillery against larger opponents and the range of targets she can engage is limited. Having a single torpedo launcher does her no favours either. She is at her best at what amounts to point-blank ranges. At high tiers this is a range where you will get killed in short order for making a mistake. Cossack has the speed, stealth and agility enough to make her attractive to a veteran but her engagement range, optimized for short-distances and limited attack power are a severe mark against her carry potential. Still, she has a diverse toolkit that will earn her some devoted supporters. – One of, if not the worst at its tier. This is a pronounced weakness. – Middle of the pack at its tier. Not terrible, but not terribly good either. – Has a significant advantage over her tier mates. A solid, competitive performer. – No other ship at its tier does this as well as this ship. Cossack's damage output and durability are best described as average. While she does have her strong points, a combination of drawbacks with her guns keeps Cossac from outperforming her peers. Her low hit point total similarly holds her back. She gets a rating in both categories. Her anti aircraft firepower is virtually non-existent and she earns a evaluation as a result. It's arguably worse than the IJN torpedo boats which is saying something. Where Cossack stands apart truly is her agility and stealth. She takes primacy from Lightning in terms of flexibility and speed. It's a closer contest for Vision Control, but she wins out against Loyang. She's the in both categories among tier VIII destroyers. Options Cossack's options are almost all standard for a British destroyer. Cossack like (new) British destroyers cannot make use of the Propulsion Modification 2 upgrade as she already has an improved version built in. Consumables Cossack's Damage Control Party is standard for a destroyer. It has unlimited charges, a 60s/40s reset timer and a 5s active period. Cossack uses a British destroyer Smoke Generator. This has 5 charges base and a 90s/70s reset timer (it's not just you, that number is stupid-weird). It emits smoke for 10s and each cloud lasts for 40s. Unlike other (new) British destroyers, Cossack has access to Engine Boost. This is a standard destroyer-version of the consumable providing an 8% speed increase with 2 charges base, an 180s/120s reset timer and a 120s active period. Cossack uses a British destroyer Hydroacoustic Search. This has 2 charges base, a 180s/120s reset timer and a 180s active period. It detects torpedoes and ships at a range of 3.00km. Upgrades Cossack should equip Magazine Modification 1 into its first upgrade slot. If you like to live dangerously, then Main Armaments Modification 1 is fine. In your second slot, the special upgrade, Hydroacoustic Search Modification 1 is optimal. If you do not have access to it, then the next upgrade you should reach for is the special upgrade Engine Boost Modification 1. If you're lacking that, then default to Propulsion Modification 1. Aiming System Modification 1 is optimal for slot 3. The only reasonable choice in your fourth slot is Steering Gears Modification 2. Similarly, the only reasonable choice in your fifth slot is Concealment Modification 1. Camouflage Cossack comes with Type 10 Camouflage. For 2,000 doubloons you may purchase Royal Navy - Cossack as a cosmetic swap. Both camouflages provide: 50% bonus experience gains 10% reduction to maintenance costs 3% reduction in surface detection 4% reduction in enemy accuracy. Cossack comes with Type 10 Camouflage in mottled grey. I personally think she looks prettier in Royal Navy - Cossack in green, black and grey, but that's only for players with deep pockets. Firepower Main Battery: Eight 120mm/45 guns in 4x2 turrets in an A-B-X-Y superfiring configuration. Torpedoes: Four torpedo tubes in a 1×4 launcher mounted amidships. The 120mm/45s that Cossack uses for her main batteries have a lot of problems at tier VIII. While perfectly serviceable at tier VII with ships like Jervis and Gadjah Mada, against the upgraded opposition faced at higher tiers they're nowhere near as competitive on a per-gun basis. This is largely owing to penetration issues due to gun caliber but there are other things to remark. They have a modest rate of fire, damage per shell and poor ballistics. The mountings on HMS Cossack are poorly situated with limited fire arcs and a lackluster traverse rate. Their only real strength is a high fire chance per shell. Her saving grace is that she has a lot of guns -- quantity has quality all of its own. However, the competition is fierce at tier VIII and even armed with eight rifles Cossack struggles finding the edge she needs. Destroyer AP shells are highly circumstantial in their utility. Most simply do not have the penetration or damage output to make them worth chancing the risk of a bounce using except in specific circumstances. Still, when a broadside is offered, switching to AP provides a much improved damage increase -- especially if your target is already burning from fires set. HMS Cossack's poor penetration values limit the range at which she can make these exchanges successfully, with her ability to citadel enemy cruisers falling off at 4km and her ability to reliably penetrate the extremities of battleships dropping off between 9km and 11km.1 Cossack's HE damage potential looks impressive, though it's important to cross reference it with her penetration values. The chart on the right shows the armour value the respective guns can best while the extremity armour on the bottom lists the prevalence of different armour types for the bow and stern. The number in brackets is the (current as of 0.7.9) number of ships with these armour values. There is a long list of targets she is incapable of damaging directly which will necessitate her making the attempt with AP shells instead. The arcs of fire on A and Y turret are terrible, contrasting the excellent arcs on B and X. On top of this, B-turret may rotate 360º which facilitates keeping it engaged even while Cossack manoeuvres. It's thus very easy to keep six guns on target most of the time but especially difficult to keep all eight firing. Bringing all eight guns to bear makes her an easy and predictable target due to the limited fields of fire on her foremost and rearmost turrets. Sacrificing a turret makes Cossack's gunnery no better than a tier VII destroyer. Cossack doesn't have the DPM advantage to be able to best contemporary gunship destroyers. The race is very close. Once you factor in the hit point totals and detection consumables, the margins get even smaller. Against anything higher tier, Cossack comes out the worse for it. This said, Cossack does have the muscle to bully anything smaller than herself short of HMCS Haida. She can play the role of a destroyer hunter provided she can ensure the detection, hit point and DPM advantage, but she has nowhere near the primacy in these categories at her tier. Against larger vessels, Cossack's guns are a mixed bag. Her ability to deal direct damage is compromised with her poor penetration values but she's an excellent fire starter. Note that this is largely owing to volume and accuracy of fire -- Cossack must be cycling all eight of her guns onto a target and landing with most of her hits to be a credible threat this way. Where Cossack truly excels is her potential to set fires. This is especially true of she eschews the use of IFHE in her commander skill build and elects to just focus on Demolition Expert instead. While this is unlikely to ever give a hale and healthy cruiser pause, it is very effective against battleships. Note, in practice these values are approximately halved when striking ships and represent only the raw fire starting potential. Thus, against a Montana, Cossack with a DE build could expect to set about 4 to 5 fires per minute. Be warned, though, the efficiency of focusing on fires leaves a lot to RNG. Cossack's performance will not be consistent. The final issue facing Cossack's gunnery is one of range and detection. She has adequate reach but she suffers from horrible ballistics. British 120mm/45 guns have worse shell arcs than American 127mm/38s. Cossack has similar gunnery challenges to Loyang, Hsienyang, Kidd and Benson without their fast rate of fire to facilitate aim correction. Cossack is greatly endangered by the prevalence of Surveillance Radar within her matchmaking tier where her short engagement range is more likely to bring her within reach of this consumable. Furthermore, her Smoke Generator does not allow for long bouts of gunnery within the safety of concealment. Cossack must contend with much of her gunnery being done while she is vulnerable to return fire if she cannot make use of island cover. Thus, Cossack must be opportunistic. Whatever ability she has to bully other destroyers falls away as she faces same or higher tiered opponents. Her guns can terrorize lower tiered vessels, including battleships but they lack the caliber needed when facing higher tiers. Throw in the usual challenges of radar in this matchmaking spread and a pattern emerges: The power and flexibility of Cossack's guns varies considerably upon the hand which she's dealt by Matchmaking. Cossack's torpedo launchers have much better rearward arcs than forward. Like her guns, Cossack is going to have to give up her full broadside to be able to fire her torpedoes at a target. Cossack's torpedoes are decent individually, but she has too few of them and bad firing arcs to boot. Cossack has HMS Daring's torpedoes but at tier VIII instead of tier X, which looks nice on paper but that single launcher holds her back. The saving grace of Cossack's torpedo armament is her ability to fire them one at a time. While getting good accuracy with single-launch torpedoes is locked behind a skill wall, once mastered it helps greatly with making up for the lack tubes. For a gunship, Cossack has better individual torpedoes than those found on the Soviet, American or German destroyers. However, like with her guns, she places a distant second to Akizuki, lacking both striking power and being unable to keep up with her damage output Furthermore, Cossack's individually more powerful torpedoes in no way makes up for having only one launcher. Like Cossack's guns, her torpedoes perform much better when she's top tier than bottom. Their 10km range is fairly standard (and an improvement on the 8km on Lightning's), however as Surveillance Radar becomes more and more prominent in higher tiers, this reach just doesn't provide the same level of safety. Ideally, a player should be able to combine Cossack's torpedoes with her excellent fire setting to stack damage over time effects on a given target. In practice, this is much easier said than done. Their limited arcs makes finding opportunities to use them difficult, especially in a pinch. When the stars align (or skill prevails), Cossack can doom an enemy vessel in short order by overtaxing their Damage Control Party between fires and floods and score herself an easy kill. However, these will be rare events rather than commonplace. As discussed, use of Cossack's gunnery and torpedoes are both steeped in challenges. One of the drawbacks of British torpedoes is their large detection range. While not quite on the same level as Japanese destroyer torpedoes, this does limit their effectiveness. Summary: The potency of her guns varies considerably based on the tier of the target she faces. Her gunnery performance is inconsistent. Her torpedoes are individually excellent but they're difficult to use, locked behind a higher skill wall. Cossack must present a lot of broadside to cycle her weapons which can make her unfortunately predictable. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : Cossack never quite gets her act together to seriously contest the Japanese gunships for their primacy at this tier. Yeah, I'm as shocked as you are that Japan now dominates the destroyer firepower meta at tier VIII. I always thought it would have been the Soviets, but here we are. Defense Hit Points: 15,200hp Min Bow & Deck Armour: 19mm The Lolibote with a redundant name sure looks OP when you lay out the maximum effective hit point total of the tier VIII destroyers like this. However, making perfect use of all four charges of her Repair Party happens so seldom. Still, she's way tougher than Cossack. Cossack has nothing going for her in this category. She has a downright middling hit point total and no fun quirks to her armour profile. This is a destroyer where you will have to manage any gunfire trades carefully to preserve your health. Her DPM advantage is not so high that she can afford to simply slug away at an enemy lolibote and hope to come out the better. The Survivability Expert skill, which ups her to an even 18,000hp should be considered mandatory lest she fall behind the staying power of other gunships. Veterans who are familiar with the play style of Loyang and Benson will no doubt be able to relate to the need to properly spend their hit points when making gunship attacks. The difference between Cossack and these American-based gunships is her worse Smoke Generator performance which limits her ability to make escapes when things go pear shaped. Cause they will. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : Cossack is in the bottom half of the vast tier VIII destroyer population. It's going to take a lot to move her up in rank -- namely another 5,000 hit points or a Repair Party consumable. Agility Top Speed: 36.0 knots Port Turning Radius: 610m Rudder Shift: 3.6s Maximum Turn Rate: 8.9º/s There's a lot to cover here. Let's hope I can put it in some semblance of good order without melting the brains of my readers. Your take away should be this: Cossack is far more agile than her in-port stats might otherwise indicate. She comes about quickly. She accelerates fast. She doesn't lose speed in a turn. Stay with me here, this graph isn't as scary as it looks. In purple, we have the sustained 4/4 speed of the tier VIII destroyers with their rudder hard over. This is how fast these destroyers can move while wiggling, dodging and coming about. In green is their nominal maximum speed -- for Cossack and Lightning, that's 36 knots. In blue, we have their engine boost speed. What makes Cossack so remarkable is that her maximum speed and turning speed pretty much overlap AND she access to an Engine Boost. This makes her a much harder target to hit, akin to a fast Soviet destroyer in terms of her forward momentum but with the added bonus that she can change her heading much more quickly. Cossack doesn't have the straight-line speed of some of her contemporaries. However, she's functionally faster than many of them. Like destroyers from the Royal Navy tech tree, Cossack preserves almost all of her speed while under manoeuvres. Most destroyers bleed off between 15% and 18% of their top speed while wiggling and dodging. Cossack loses less than 2%. In addition, Cossack comes about almost as nimbly as USS Sims -- one of the most agile mid-tier destroyers in the game, and at a higher sustained speed. For enemies trying to pick her off at range, Cossack presents the dual challenge of a ridiculously high top speed with an nimble target, giving the best traits of both American and Soviet lolibotes in a single package. It doesn't stop there. From a dead stop, Cossack accelerates as much as 25% faster than a similar destroyer equipped with Propulsion Modification 2. From a dead stop, Cossack is quick to get moving again, helping her avoid sudden threats like incoming torpedoes or being lit by Surveillance Radar. Cossack gets the best of both worlds when it comes to upgrades; she enjoys better acceleration than she would have receive with Propulsion Modification 2 and she gets the improved rudder shift time of Steering Gears Modification 2. Unlike other Royal Navy destroyers, Cossack gets all of this without sacrificing access to Engine Boost. Combined with a Sierra Mike signal, she can get her speed up to 40.8kts for these brief spells while keeping all of the aforementioned bonuses to her handling. While ships like Kiev and the upcoming Le Terrible can outpace her in a straight line, Cossack wins out in overall handling and flexibility in combat situations. She trivializes dodging incoming fire and dancing torpedo beats. Paper stats won't tell the whole story. If you looked at a combination of Cossack's top speed, turning radius and rudder shift time, she'd look deceptively mediocre. The engine power of the Royal Navy destroyers and their energy preservation means that they perform on an entirely different level from the other lolibotes, making Cossack far more nimble than her stats otherwise indicate. Her Engine Boost consumable adds even more flexibility than even Lightning can boast, making Cossack the most agile destroyer at her tier.[/caption] Summary Boosted acceleration. Little to no loss of speed in a turn. Cossack can rocket-butt with Engine Boost unlike other British DDs. Evaluation: What would have to happen to DOWNGRADE to : Loss of her Engine Boost consumable would be enough. This is a closely contested category at tier VIII with Lightning being hot on Cossack's heels with better rate of turn and a smaller turning radius. Anti-Aircraft Defense AA Battery Calibers: 40mm / 12.7mm AA Umbrella Ranges: 2.5km / 1.2km AA DPS per Aura: 12.9 / 4.2 Hahaha, no. Cossack has no large caliber AA guns to speak of. Even cursory HE damage is likely to strip her of all of her remaining defensive weapons. Enemy aircraft carriers should feel completely safe in having their planes loiter over Cossack and friendly carriers should abstain from dragging enemy aircraft near Cossack. She'll be of no help. ... except I did. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : Cossack only barely ekes out the worst AA rating at tier VIII. Asashio is only marginally better with less DPS but more range. In theory, it wouldn't take much to nudge Cossack up the ladder, but don't ever assume this would make her evaluation passable here. Refrigerator Base Surface Detection Range: 6.97km Air Detection Range: 3.90km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 5.48km Detection Range when Firing from Smoke: 2.48km Main Battery Firing Range: 11.89km Detection Consumables: Smoke Generator / Hydroacoustic Search There's a whole lot of weirdness crammed into Cossack's refrigerator. She is currently the rated tier VIII destroyer in terms of stealth and detection, however this is a title she doesn't claim easily. There are three elements which define her concealment: her surface detection range, her Hydroacoustic Search and her Smoke Generator. Surface Detection Spotting distance delta (in meters) between HMS Cossack and the destroyers within her matchmaking spread when fully upgraded for concealment. This chart is restricted only to those destroyers within +/- 500m spread of Cossack's optimized stealth rating. Note that a distance of at least 200m is necessary to have a plausible chance of a reactionary advantage over an opponent and more is preferable. There are few destroyers that can challenge her concealment rating. Cossack is one of the stealthiest destroyers not only at her tier but also within her matchmaking spread. Only the Kagero-class sisters (Kagero, Asashio, Harekaze) have an improved stealth rating as low as 5.374km to Cossack's 5.476km. In open water with every other match-up, Cossack will detect enemies before she herself is seen. Generally speaking, when Cossack is top tier, she will dominate scouting. It's only when she faces tier IX opponents that things get harried, with detection ranges being close enough that Cossack is likely to trip over an enemy destroyer without enough time to react. Surveillance Radar, always the bane of destroyers (and gunship destroyers especially), is a very real and especially prevalent threat to Cossack's well being. When she's bottom tier, Cossack faces several ships with radar that meet or outstrip their surface detection range. There is very little counterplay she can exercise against ships armed with this consumable short of having advanced knowledge of their approximate location. Keep a wary eye on team rosters and behave accordingly. Hydroacoustic Search HMS Cossack comes with a Royal Navy Destroyer safety blanket -- her Hydroacoustic Search. In the radar-heavy environment in which she plays, this lacks the offensive utility found on HMCS Haida and it's largely reserved for simply sniffing out torpedoes. Still, it is possible for Cossack to unmask ships hiding within smoke screens while using her consumable, however she needs to get even closer than her Canadian counterpart to do it. This tactic is largely inadvisable given Cossack's difficulties in getting away once detected but it can be pulled off in a pinch, especially in late game scenarios where an enemy destroyer lacks support. Exploit that three minute duration -- she can outlast the longer ranged (and easier to use) consumables found on Loyang and German destroyers. Outside of these very specific instances, Cossack's Hydroacoustic Search is better used defensively -- giving her the time necessary to avoid incoming torpedo strikes. In most games, this will largely be its purpose. Vigilance is a helpful skill in this regard for team play purposes if you can afford it. Still, this consumable provides a degree of flexibility to the ship that expert players can exploit and to underestimate or dismiss it would be a mistake. Cossack belongs up on the front lines, projecting vision forward for her team and sniffing out early torpedo threats. Smoke Generator There's a big ol' "but" looming over Cossack's superior vision control. She may have great surface detection. She may have a very handy detection consumable that keeps her safe from torpedoes and can be used offensively in a pinch. Butt, her Smoke Generator stinks. Shackled to the same terrible smoke consumable as the British destroyers in the tech tree, Cossack is held back by its low emission and duration times. She doesn't make many smoke clouds for one. What smoke she does make doesn't last nearly long enough to be comfortable, undermining both Cossack's survivability and her ability to deal damage. When used offensively, Cossack can only park in smoke for 40 seconds at a time. With American battleships boasting up to 20s worth of immunity with their Damage Control Party, Cossack isn't going to seriously contest her opponent's ability to put out fires. This necessitates other tactics to get the most out of the potential damage output of her guns. Borrowing the smoke from another ship is one way such as in a division. She can also take a page from American cruiser and destroyer game play and use island cover to lob her shells at enemies that cannot see her but her lack of reach makes this difficult. Finally she can simply elect to fire from open water and risk trading her hit points. I would hardly call this ideal given her low hit point total. Defensively, her smoke is also found wanting. At top speed in a straight line, Cossack drops all of three (count 'em) smoke clouds. If you install the special upgrade, Smoke Generator Modification 1 you get one more puff. That's it -- hardly worth the coal investment. Cossack's consumable is not so much a smoke screen as a squid's ink-squirt. If Cossack has been firing her guns, she may not being able to create enough smoke to block line of sight to multiple opponents (which will make you wonder why you even bothered). Fortunately, if you cut your speed the moment you activate her consumable, Cossack will come to a stop inside the last cloud. Don't wait on the throttle though -- you need to be decelerating the moment you begin laying down your rings. At least Cossack's smoke reset timer isn't punitive. The delay between dissipating and the availability of her next charge can be as little as 20 seconds with the correct commander and signal combination. With up to seven charges available, Cossack simply needs to hold her fire for brief intervals before setting up for another round of shooting. Patience and careful planning can almost make up for all of her consumable's shortcomings. Closely Contested Cossack is an excellent scout. Few destroyers at tier VIII can sit as comfortably on the front lines, broadcasting back enemy positions for their team as Cossack can. In addition, her forward position helps protect her allies from long range torpedo salvos which become quite commonplace within her matchmaking. This isn't a safe place to be, however, and Cossack lacks reliable smoke from her toolkit to give her a sense of security. Cossack may be one of the stealthiest ships at her tier and one of the best destroyers for controlling vision for her team. However, this is very little room for error. Summary Great open water concealment. Hydroacoustic Search combined with her great acceleration and handling makes enemy torpedoes launched at range a non-threat. Her smoke smells like butts. At least she gets a lot of quick-reloading charges. Evaluation: What would have to happen to DOWNGRADE to : Top spot among the tier VIII destroyers is heavily contested. The Japanese torpedo ships have the best raw concealment values. Loyang has arguably the best combination of detection consumables though her surface detection is too big to take the crown. Cossack wins out on primacy despite the flaw of her Smoke Generator, but not without contention. Keeping Oskar from becoming a Sam Skills rated by their utility in descending order from purple, to blue, to green, to red. For the colourblind, they're also rated by hearts. Cossack's initial skill choices are fairly standard for a gunship. Start with Priority Target. Next take Last Stand at tier 2. Survivability Expert is optimal at tier 3. And finish off your 10th point with Concealment Expert. Basic Fire Training should be a must on anyone's list after that and Adrenaline Rush is also optimal. From there, spend your last four points as you will. Final Evaluation I'm not one to blame matchmaking. However, Cossack's fortunes are more firmly tied to matchmaking than many other ships I've played in recent memory. I think it's largely owing to how Cossack performs when she up-tiers. To be absolutely clear, Cossack is a beast when she's the top of the pile. There are very few opponents she cannot engage comfortably and it's only those vessels at her own tier which give her pause. However, Cossack doesn't feel anywhere near as comfortable when she has to go up against tier IX and X opponents. This isn't a problem unique to Cossack, but it is more pronounced in her case. Her guns have a very limited menu of appetizing targets when she faces same or higher tiered opponents. It's not that she can't deal damage when bottom tier, it's simply more of a challenge than for other destroyers. She reminds me very much of most tier V battleships, where they can feel like real powerhouses in those rare times that matchmaking favours them and victims otherwise. Your mileage in Cossack will vary based upon not only where your placed on the Matchmaking roster but what's on the enemy team. So long as she's facing enemy destroyers and cruisers with soft squishy bits she can pelt with her pew pews, you're going to have a great time regardless of her tier. If you suddenly find yourself facing down tier VIII+ American and German heavy cruisers, a heavy battleship lineup or Japanese ducky-destroyers, life's going to be a lot more difficult. Fortunately, Cossack still has a role when she can't be the big dog. When she's no longer able to deal direct damage easily, she excels at simply putting eyes on targets and pressuring cap circles. It's difficult to dislodge an RNDD that has setup shop around a given cap short of using concerted air power or a constant barrage of radiation from Surveillance Radar to drive them back. Cossack won't come out of said matches with much to show for it other than a win if everything goes right, unfortunately. I do like Cossack, but she doesn't inspire the same kind of awe her sister ship, Haida did for me. There's a lot to enjoy with this ship. Few feels as comfortable as she does when top tier and even in those uptiered matches, she can serve you well provided you meet the right opponents. However, in those games where there's nothing but hard targets, the pickings get mighty slim. I dunno why, but I'm a fan of Cossack's alternative camouflage. I wish it didn't cost 2,000 doubloons to make my ship look pretty, but oh well. Would I Recommend? Cossack was originally made available through the Royal Navy event which ran in the last quarter of 2018. Wargaming assigned her a cost of 50 Guineas with players able to earn up to 48 Guineas over three patches. It's not you -- the math doesn't add up. The assumption is that players will have to pay for the difference with a Guinea setting you back around $1 USD. Otherwise, players may acquire her for the equivalent cost of 9,600 doubloons + the price of a port slot. PVE Battles How well does the ship maintain profitability in Co-Op modes and how does she fare against bots? No. Cossack does alright in Operation Dynamo, but her contribution is very one-sided with being largely limited to engaging the torpedo boats. Her AA power is virtually non-existent. Co-Op isn't kind to gunship destroyers, particularly those with only modest hit point pools and limited torpedo options. Random Battle Grinding: This includes training captains, collecting free experience, earning credits and collecting signal flags from achievements. Yes with a butt. Cossack doesn't play much differently than the other Royal Navy destroyers and her skill choices overlap nicely (especially with captains for Icarus, Jervis, Jutland and Daring). The only issue is that earnings get a might bit slim of matchmaking doesn't love you. For Competitive Gaming: Competitive Gaming includes Ranked Battles and other skill-based tournaments. This also includes stat-padding. No. There are better choices, namely Loyang and Akizuki. For Collectors: If you enjoy ship history or possessing rare ships, this section is for you. Yes. Now you too can own a memento of the ship that predicated the early invasion of Norway! Slap on a Hotel Yankee signal, board some enemies and cause an international incident! For Fun Factor: Bottom line: Is the ship fun to play? Yes. While I'd rather play Haida, that's my own Canadian bias speaking. Cossack is a fun ship though be warned, she is a tier VIII destroyer. That comes with all of the hangups that tier VIII destroyers face. What's the Final Verdict? How would the ship rate on an Angry YouTuber scale of Garbage - Meh - Gud - Overpowered? GARBAGE- The boat is unbalanced, not fun to play and weak. The ship desperately needs some buffs or some quality of life changes. Mehbote - An average ship. Has strengths and weaknesses. Doesn't need buffs to be viable however she's not going to be considered optimal. Gudbote - A powerful ship, often one of the best ships at a given role within its tier. Usually considered optimal for a given task. OVERPOWERED - The boat is unbalanced and powerful. Typically she's either horrible to play against or she redefines the meta entirely In Closing Is it over? I think it's over! Cossack (and Haida) have been on books since January of 2018 -- that's over nine months of work that has gone into reviewing her and her sister ship with too many different versions between them. As you can imagine, there was a lot of information to keep track of with her performance changing so regularly. While I'm happy the two ships aren't terrible, I'm very (very) glad to be able to stop worrying about Cossack for a while. I want to thank my readers and fans who helped keep me sane over these months and an especially well deserved thanks to my Patrons on Patreon who helped keep me fed. I won't have to dig her out again until there's another tier VIII destroyer to review for a comparative study. But that won't happen for another ... Aww, sh-- ...! Appendix (1) Penetration data courtesy of Proships.ru (https://www.proships.ru) and World of Warships AP Calculator (https://mustanghx.github.io/ship_ap_calculator/).
  10. Do the lower-tier British carriers feature the venerable Swordfish in their air wings?
  11. So. I was just messing around and I found the list of the ships that the British that took part in the Falkland war and I noticed something, most ships were equipped for air defense and for ASW. Since my knowledge of naval warfare post 1945 consist of watching Hunt for the Red October and other sub movies please could someone please answer me how was a surface combat between destroyers, frigates and other ships of the like supposed to be conducted by RN ships? Whit what weapons and whit what possible startegy? PS: Yes, I know that submarines would had sunk anything that was too close (Like the Belgrano) but still, there had too be some doctrine to engage other ships whit their own.
  12. Today I am going to showcase my experience in the Tier 8 Royal Navy Destroyer, the Lightning. Overall a decent ship, but my experience in it was "something different" compaired to other ships I have played.
  13. I love my gunboat DDs. I'm an average at best cruiser player, and only good in some BBs, but my happy place is filled with names like Clemson, Farragut, Z-52, Akizuki/Haragumo, Vampire, Fletcher, etc. I enjoy hunting DDs, controlling caps, spotting and vision control, and such, and I find it's my best way to contribute to wins. I like playing fast and aggressive but still having to be thoughtful about movement and positioning. I'm an average player overall, but in a gunboat DD I can carry games that I am not capable of carrying in other ships. So when it became evident that the RN line would be optimized for the fleet DD role, I was excited. So far....the results are mixed, but I am optimistic for the rest of the line. I won't unlock Lightning until Wednesday as I've completed all the container missions and didn't unlock her, but I've gotten some time with Acasta, Icarus, and Jervis. (Valkyrie looks like it will play similarly to Vampire with a bit more torp flexibility and emphasis, so I'll try her and Wakeful after launch as well.) Here's my impressions of Acasta, with Icarus and Jervis coming later tonight or tomorrow and the rest coming soon (I probably wont have much time to play next weekend so it will be a bit of time before I cover Lightning, Jutland, and Daring.) 'The Acasta Doing Business - Mid-Tier Meh "A lot like T-22, except even more boring and ineffectual" It was evident even before playing them that a lot of the British DDs would have reasonably high skill floors and would be 'better than sum of its parts' boats given the 'fleet DD' niche. Acasta is clearly a step in that evolutionary line, but in her case, sh's likely a 'grindwall' boat that most players will be glad to get out of. Even as someone with realistic expectations and who enjoys that playstyle, I didn't enjoy her. Full disclosure: I played 2 games in her and then sidelined her after unlocking Icarus mission. So maybe others make her work better after some more time, but I have played enough Gallant and enough other gunboat DDs to know Acasta wasn't for me. She's just aggressively meh. She doesn't excel in anything, but neither does T-61 and that's one of my favorite boats; she's just not good enough at enough things to make her fun. Her guns are meh, with a slow traverse and low dpm output making her vulnerable to USN DDs, and aside from the flexibility of her singlefire torps, her torps aren't anything to write home about. You can't launch from stealth except in ambush or at an approaching target. When the cards fall right, you can still devstrike anything easily with 8 torps on the same vector, or easily design your own spreads to improve odds of getting at least one hit. I have used this skill to great effect with my Gallant, but with 6km torps (and 6km stealth even at full-stealth build) I struggled to do so with Acasta. Good players will get some fantastic results out of these torps on occasion when they use single-fire perfectly, but it's going to be rare-ish and you're going to have to work harder to get good torp results than other DDs. Her guns are also a weakness. Like USN DDs, RN DDs have high shell arcs that necessitate engagements at closer ranges than Russian or (to a lesser extent) German DDs. But USN DDs just spank this boat 1v1 in a gunfight. She isn't even competitive with Clemson for cap control, much less Nicholas or Farragut. Her nimbleness helps her avoid torps but you wont dodge much gunfire at that range, and her RN smoke is even shorter because tier 5. Plus, the hydro later tiers get isnt present here. I've played a lot of Farragut and Clemson and know every trick in the book to use torps when you can't *quite* stealthtorp in most conditions, but the singlefire capability doesnt make up for the fairly weak torpedoes here, and her guns just aren't good enough to deal damage when you can't pull off ambushes, unlike the USN boats. This is a boat in which even experienced gunboaters will struggle to do damage on a consistent basis. She's nimble and accelerates quickly, she can use singlefire torps to torp entire smokescreens to flush or kill red DDs or to devstrike a BB from ambush, and she can spot and help kill DDs, but she doesn't beat ANYTHING 1v1 in a stand-up fight except a badly played IJN torpboat, and even then she doesn't have hydro for the extra cushion so her nimbleness is key to not eating torps. I think very good players can make her work very well, and I wouldn't be surprised to see her do well in the t5 ranked season in the hands of a good player. But she's going to uptier even more poorly than most tier 5 boats. She'll never be a popular boat; for one, the most OP dd for its tier is Kamikaze at tier 5, and although tier 5 is a fairly weak tier for gunboat DDs anyway, Acasta is just not equipped to excel in randoms with her toolkit. PROS: *Single-fire torps. Great for island ambushes of ships coming around a corner, strait/gap control, or torping smoke clouds when you're pretty sure a red DD is in there due to flexibility of torp spread design (can drop them all in a row or spread them out as you see fit. *Good acceleration and handling: RN DDs don't get speed boost, but they accelerate quick and hold speed in a turn. These aren't huge advantages, but they help you knife-fight other DDs and still avoid torps, and help get you out of trouble. *Decent stealth: You'll outspot Clemson and Farragut (Nicholas noses you out), outspot Gaede and Maass, and all Russian DDs. You get outspotted by IJN DDs but not by too much. And your smoke is great for breaking contact and vision control even though it sucks for offensive use. CONS: *Meh guns: the improved AP ricochet angles RN ships get doesn't seem to help much (although small sample size as I didn't play too much of her) and the low effective range (due to firing arcs), meh traverse, meh reload speed, and meh DPM mean you get your [edited]kicked by any other gunboat 1v1 assuming equally skilled players. *Situational torps: I'm used to not being able to stealthtorp; as I said, I play Clemson and Farragut often. But these torps are slowish, meh damage, and your torp range is identical to your concealment. Use them to torp smoke clouds, but don't count on racking up BB kills when they're not dumb enough to come around the corner of an island predictably enough for you to launch your torps in a line right at him. *No speed boost + low hp = low survivability: She's nimble, and her quick-reload smoke can help break contact, but if you overextend you're not going to find it easy to get back out. Her stealth is ok but she can still be outspotted by several common DDs at that tier, and she can't just boost out of trouble, so she can find herself getting focused down and her smoke is really the only thing that can buy time to bail. And once she is getting focused, she doesn't have the HP pool to last long. You've got to play smart; lone wolf deep-penetration tactics are a death wish in Acasta. *Tier 5 matchmaking: I personally enjoy the challenge of being bottom tier in most boats. However, aside from her stealth advantage over many tier 6 and 7 DDs, this is a boat that gets murdered at bottom tier. I think she'll surprise people in tier 5 ranked, but this boat is going to be terribad in randoms because she'll be bottom tier 40-50% of the time and she just doesnt have the toolkit to be effective at all. This is literally the worst t5 DD to be in a tier 7 match with. When you're uptiered, you'll jhave to work hard and play out of your mind doing all the little things to get your xp and contribute meaningfully, because you can't effectively engage anything but isolated and wounded targets and you will get pushed off caps easily. TL;DR: she fits perfectly in the niche Wargaming wanted RN DDs to fill, but in this tier, that niche just doesn't work. She's right up there with T-22 as an incredibly boring boat, and even when you find ways to win and contribute, you won't feel like you've done all that much even though you worked hard all game to do what little you did. But don't worry, Icarus is an improvement and Jervis is a strong boat, so just keep grinding. It'll be over soon. (My other reviews - British BBs: Conqueror/Lion Monarch KGV Queen Elizabeth French BBs: Overall Line Review German DDs: Flottentorpedoboot My Waifu)
  14. Just wanting to share a video I think many will find intresting. It's about how the Royal Navy used one of the relics of the R class battleships during the Battle of Britain. Hope you enjoy.
  15. Commissar_Carl

    HE penetration of 4.5 inch guns

    I am confused as to the HE penetration on the two high tier DDs, Daring and Jutland. If I recall correctly both Notser and Flamu have stated that without IFHE thier guns are incapable of penning other top tier destroyers or the superstructure of larger ships. My question is why? The 4.5 inch guns are in metric 114 mm. With the 1/6 caliber ruler for HE pen, 114/6=19mm of HE pen... which is the same as the plating of all the DD's in their tier and the superstructure of any BB or CA. More than this, with IFHE the guns get a extra 25 percent, so 19/4= 4.75, and added to 19 is 23.75. That shouldn't be enough to cross any armor thresholds, and should make IFHE worthless for these ships as opposed to compulsatory. The only 2 reasons I can think of that this would not be the case are that A) I actually do not understand how HE pen works, or B) Wg is using the technically more accurate caliber of 4.45 inches for the shell, making 113mm so it is barely not enough. However, they advertise it as being 114mm in the dev blog. So, thoughts?
  16. MS406france1940

    Was this destroyer really this lucky?

    While I am a bigger fan of Wikipedia than almost anyone I am NOT a fan boy of the site, and if I see something whitout citations I immediately raise an eyebrow. In this case the following bold claim made by wiki is that the destroyer HMS Jervis went around WW 2 whitout loosing a single crew member. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Jervis#1940_(Mediterranean)) So is it true, false, 50/50 or something else?
  17. Hiro804

    Loving this coffee mug

    Just had to share this.
  18. Admiral_Bingo

    RN CL Dido Premium Proposal

    Hello everyone, This is my first post. :) I would like to suggest this ship as a new premium and like to discuss what would it be like if it was actually added to the game. HMS Dido The reason why I chose this ship is because I would like to entertain the thought of having a RN Atlanta. Having similar armament, it would have a reload time around 5 seconds and just like the Atlanta, have unlimited charges of the DFAA consumable because of its AA build. Some difference would be the shell type. Being a RN cruiser, it can only fire AP shells with the special RN ballistics while Atlanta could fire both types. While the Atlanta has HE and Radar, Dido trades these off for heal and smoke, making it different in terms of handling from Atlanta and Flint. However, because of its armament, it would have similar range like the Atlanta requiring the player to adapt to a similar game play of Atlanta. So what specs, consumables, or other stuff should the ship have while keeping it relatively balanced?
  19. Straight forward question, really. Not only is Belfast permanently pulled from the store and never be available to new players, but she's also quite different in playstyle than other RN CLs given her lack of heal, lack of torpedoes, HE spamming firepower, and radar+smoke combo that absolutely everyone loves and wishes to see more of. Soooo ... given Belfast will no longer be available to those who never purchased her originally, this basically means the tech tree line is devoid of a premium captain trainer and money maker. Shouldn't we be seeing one by now?
  20. so you need 250k credits in 1 game in a brit dd , tier 5 to 8 so they make Arms Race a mode you can use only its tier9 and 10 with no british dd useable. then they leave out scenarios and let you do it in ranked for the 1/10 of a percent who have bought the Cossack.
  21. Corsair_I

    How to get the 48 Guineas

    Hello all, My understanding is that you need 50 Guinees to get the Cossack destroyer. You can only get 48 Guineas through the game and you have to buy 2 last Guineas. I have completed all Royal Navy missions but one, the one that requires tier 8 Royal Navy DD and above. So far, I only collected 4 Guineas. Will I suddenly collect the 44 remaining Guineas when I complete the last mission or how will I get the remaining Guineas?
  22. Commissar_Carl

    360 degree turret rotation?

    With the new dev blog it was revealed that the x turret of Jervis, along with all the turrets of the lightning, Jutland, and Daring will be able to rotate 360 degrees. As far as balance goes I think this is great. But could these ships really do that? I know that in game the Haida (and I'd imagine Cossak) have 360 degree rotation on their B mounts, but Navweaps says that they have +160/-160 degrees of train. For that mount ( i think the mk XIX dual 120mm mount off the top of my head) was it able to rotate 360 but disabled fron firing in the deadzone, or could it just not rotate 360 degrees? Just want to see if anyone has answers on this.
  23. TheDgamesD

    Dido-Class Cruiser

    Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dido-class_cruiser "The Dido class was a class of sixteen (including five within the Bellona sub-class) light cruisers built for the British Royal Navy. The design was influenced by the inter-war Arethusa-class light cruisers. The first group of three ships were commissioned in 1940, the second group (six ships) and third group (two ships) were commissioned between 1941–1942. The Bellona subclass ships were commissioned between 1943 and 1944. Most members of the class were given names drawn from classical history and legend. Post war in the expanded 1951 programme of the Korean War Emergency a broad beam Bellona class armed with 4 twin Mk 6 4.5 guns was considered as a cruiser option along with the 1951 Minotaur class and the Tiger class completed with two Mk 24 6 inch turrets and 4 twin Mk 6 4.5. From the initial trials of the lead ship of the class, Bonaventure the new light cruisers were considered a significant advance, with the 5.25 turrets, far more modern in design than previous light cruiser turrets, and offering efficient loading up to 90 degrees to give some DP capability. While some damage was experienced initially in extreme North Atlantic conditions, modified handling avoided the problem. The fitting of the three turrets forward in A,B and Q position depended on some use of Aluminium in structure and the non availability of aluminium after Dunkirk was one of the reasons for only 4 turrets being fitted to the later ships. The Dido class were designed as small trade protection cruisers and for action in the Mediterranean Sea, where they were surprisingly effective in protecting crucial convoys to Malta and managed to see off far larger ships of the Italian Royal Navy. The 5.25-inch (133 mm) gun was primarily a surface weapon, but it was intended to fire the heaviest shell suitable for anti-aircraft defence and accounted for around 23 aircraft and saw off far more. Four original Dido-class ships were lost during the war: HMS Bonaventure, HMS Charybdis, HMS Hermione, and HMS Naiad. The original ship of the class, HMS Dido, was mothballed in 1947 and decommissioned ten years later. HMS Euryalus was the last remaining in-service ship of the original class, being decommissioned in 1954 and scrapped in 1959. The Bellona class (as well as four rebuilt Dido ships) were mainly intended as picket ships for amphibious warfare operations, in support of aircraft carriers of the Royal Navy and United States Navy in the Pacific. HMS Spartan was the only ship of the sub-class to be sunk, struck by a German Fritz X while supporting the Anzio landings. Post war modernisation proposals were limited by the tight war emergency design which offered inadequate space and weight for the fire control and magazines for four or five 3-inch twin 70 turrets combined with the fact the heavy to handle 5.25-inch shells fitted when the cruisers were built had a large burst shock which made them a more effective high level AA weapon than post war RN 4.5-inch guns. HMS Royalist was somewhat different from the rest of the class, as it was modified to be a command ship of aircraft carrier and cruiser groups intended for action against German battlecruisers. It was later ordered to be rebuilt, by Winston Churchill, for potential action alongside HMS Vanguard against the post-war Soviet Sverdlov-class cruisers and Stalingrad-class battlecruisers. In 1956, Royalist was loaned to the Royal New Zealand Navy (RNZN), with whom it served until 1966. Despite being part of the RNZN, Royal Navy officers made up the majority of the senior command. During the Indonesia–Malaysia confrontation, it was regarded not only as the last Dido-class ship but also the last cruiser of the Royal Navy. The ship was decommissioned in 1967. The class were intended to be armed with ten 5.25-inch (133 mm) guns in five twin turrets, which were of the same circular design as the secondary armament in the King George V-class battleships. A shortage of the guns, due to difficulties in manufacturing them, led to the first group being armed with only eight 5.25-inch guns in four twin turrets. The fifth twin turret was added later to Dido only. The first group was also armed with a 4-inch (102 mm) gun for firing star shell and two quadruple QF 2-pounder (40 mm) "pom-poms". The second group had the five twin 5.25-inch guns but did not have the 4 in (102 mm) gun. The third group's armament was changed due to the shortage of 5.25 in guns, being armed with eight 4.5-inch (113 mm) guns in four twin turrets instead. The 4.5-inch gun was better suited to the primary anti-aircraft role of the Dido class. The forward A & B 4.5 turrets were mounted on the top of conjoint deckhouses, extending the superstructure to allow the 2 cruisers to play a flagship role with more accommodation and radar rooms. The high mounting of the 4.5 turrets forshadows the high freeboard and superstructure of the twin 4.5 A & B mounting on the County GMDs, 20 years later. The high rate of fire of the 4.5 turrets and the unique arrangement for a British cruiser of the shell and charge being loaded in a combined case,and simpler DP twin DCT, Red DCT for A 7 B and Blue for X & Y m meant in many senses the Scylla and Charbydis were the only Dido class that were, true AA cruisers The 4.0-inch (102 mm) gun was also fitted and the 2-pounder armament was increased from eight to ten. The Bellona subclass differed in appearance somewhat from their predecessors. They had eight 5.25-inch (133 mm) RP10MkII guns in four twin turrets and had greatly improved anti-aircraft armament, with twelve 2-pounder guns and twelve Oerlikon 20 mm cannons. The bridge of the Bellona class was lowered by one deck compared to the previous three groups, which allowed full radar control to be fitted to the 5.25-inch (133 mm) turrets and 2-pounder guns, due to the decreased topweight. These ships used the HACS high angle fire control system. The two funnels were more upright than the raked ones of the original Dido class. In World War II, the Dido class saw much action, including the Battle of Cape Matapan, the Second Battle of Sirte, Operation Torch, Operation Overlord and the Battle of Okinawa, as well as many other duties in the Mediterranean and Pacific. The class lost five ships during the war (Bonaventure, Charybdis, Hermione, Naiad, and Spartan); in addition Scylla was badly damaged by a naval mine and declared a constructive total loss. The post-war survivors continued in service; all were decommissioned by the 1960s. Bellona, Black Prince and Royalist were lent to the Royal New Zealand Navy post-World War II. In 1956, Diadem was sold to Pakistan and renamed Babur. The Dido's Bonaventure completed with only four twin 5.25 in turrets because of shortages and received a 4-inch starshell gun in "X" position. She had received a radar set before October 1940 but was otherwise unaltered. Naiad completed with five turrets. She received five single 20 mm in September 1941 and had radar Type 279 by this time. Phoebe completed with four turrets and was fitted with a 4-inch gun in "Q" position forward of the bridge. The latter was landed during her refit between November 1941 and April 1942 at New York City, along with the .5-inch machine guns and Type 279 radar, while a quadruple 2 pdr supplanted the 4-inch gun and eleven single 20 mm guns were fitted. Radars were now Type 281, 284 and 285. The "A" turret was temporarily removed at the end of 1942 after torpedo damage. During repairs in the first six months of 1943, all three quadruple 2 pdr mounts were landed, as were seven single 20 mm, to be replaced by three quadruple 40 mm Bofors guns and six twin 20 mm. Radar Type 272 was also fitted. A turret was replaced in July 1943. Her light anti-aircraft weaponry in April 1944 was twelve 40 mm (3 × 4) and sixteen 20 mm (6 × 2, 4 × l). Dido had four turrets and a 4-inch gun similar to Phoebe. The 4 in and the machine guns were removed in the latter half of 1941 at Brooklyn Navy Yard, when Q 5.25 in turret was shipped and five single 20 mm were fitted. In the early summer of 1943 three single 20 mm were exchanged for four twin 20 mm and the radar outfit was altered by the addition of Types 272, 282, 284 and 285. April 1944 lists show only eight 20 mm. Euryalus completed with her designed armament. In September 1941 the .5 in MGs were landed and five single 20 mm fitted. Two more were added by September 1942. By mid-1943 two single 20mm had been removed and four twin 20 mm shipped. The type 279 radar was replaced by types 272, 281, 282 and 285. In a long refit from October 1943 to July 1944, Q turret was replaced by a quadruple 2 pdr and two twin 20 mm were fitted. Radar 271 and 272 were removed and types 279b, 277 and 293 fitted. Hermione was also completed as a five-turret ship. She had the .5 in MGs removed in October/November 1941 and received five single 20 mm. Sirius was completed with five turrets and five 20 mm. She had received two more 20 mm by mid-1943. One of these was landed at Massawa at the end of 1943 and two 40 mm Bofors Mk III were fitted. She is listed as having only seven 20 mm as light AA in April 1944. By April 1945 she had two Mk III 40 mm fitted and had landed two single 20 mm. Cleopatra was completed with two 2-pounders in 1942 in lieu of the .5 in MGs but these were removed in the middle of the year and replaced by five 20 mm. A sixth 20 mm was added in mid-1943. During repairs between November 1943 and November 1944, Q turret was removed, as were two quadruple 2 pdr and five 20 mm. Three quadruple 40 mm Bofors and six twin 20 mm were fitted and the singles numbered four. In 1951 the US sourced quad bofors and Oerilikon's were replaced by 3 twin MK 5 Bofors and 8 single Mk 7. Argonaut was completed with four single 20 mm in lieu of the .5 in MGs. She had Q turret removed during repairs in 1943/44, and lost the four single 20 mm. She received a quadruple 2 pdr in lieu of the 5.25 in, and had five twin 20 mm fitted. By April 1944 her light AA comprised three quadruple 2 pdr, six twin power-operated 20 mm and five single. By the end of the war with Japan she had received five 40 mm Bofors and three single 40 mm Bofors Mk III. Scylla was completed with four twin 4.5 in Mk III in UD MK III mountings because of a shortage of 5.25 in mountings. The forward superstructure was considerably modified to accommodate these and also to increase crew spaces. Her light AA on completion was eight single 20 mm. Six twin power-operated 20 mm were added at the end of 1943. Charybdis was also completed with four twin 4.5 inch, and had in addition a single 4 in Mk V forward of X mounting. Her light AA at completion was four single 20 mm and two single 2 pdr. The 4 inch starshell gun and two single 2 pdr were removed and replaced by two twin and two single 20 mm, probably in 1943. Bellonas Spartan received no alterations as far as is known. Royalist was converted to an escort carrier squadron flagship immediately on completion, when an extra two twin 20 mm were fitted as well as four single 20 mm. She was the only ship to receive an extensive postwar modernisation ordered for the RN but was later sold to New Zealand. Plans were drawn up to fully modernise the four improved Didos with either four twin 3 inch L70 guns or Mk 6 4.5 inch guns. However, that would have required building new broad beamed Didos (as was seriously considered in 1950-54). This was because the magazines of the Royalist type could hold only enough 3 inch ammunition for 3 minutes and 20 seconds of continuous firing. The refit of Royalist was shortened and that of Diadem abandoned because new steam turbines were regarded as both necessary and unaffordable. Royalist′s reconstruction, like that of Newfoundland, incorporated much of the RN's late 1940s and early 1950s view of a desirable cruiser. Royalist′s 5.25 inch armament was given some of the improvements of the final 5.25 inch mounts built for Vanguard, but not the extra space or power ramming. Also added was a secondary armament of 3 STAAG auto twin 40mm, new 293, 960M radar and Type 275(2 sets) DP fire control for the 5.25 guns, and a lattice mast. (Royalist was loaned to the RNZN in 1956, in exchange for Bellona). Bellona had four single 20 mm added by April 1944, and received an extra eight single 20 mm by April 1945. (She was loaned to the RNZN after the war and operational 1946-52, the twin Oerlikons had been replaced by 6 single MK3P 40mm in the RNZN unique kiwi electric powered mount, but Bellona was never actually fitted with 6 standard tacymetric directors, requested by the RNZN for controlling the Bofors. The RNZN mothballed the quad pom pom mounts for manning reasons, but maintained the single oerlikons on HMNZS Bellona.). Black Prince and Diadem also received eight single 20 mm, and had a further two twin 20 mm by early 1945. (Black Prince was loaned to the RNZN after the war and was operational briefly in 1947 before part of her crew mutinied and were discharged, and after a 1952 refit with 8 single Mk3P 40mm which were electric powered, like the RN Mk 9 and 6 single Oerlikon and operated till 1955, which included a visit to the 1953 Fleet Review at Spithead. Diadem was sold to Pakistan in 1956, after a modest refit with 293 and 281 radar and standardised 40mm twin and single light AA guns. Her 5.25" guns were fired in Pakistan's brief war with India in 1961. Diadem became a cadet training ship in 1962 and was renamed Babur)." They were basically RN versions of the USN Atlanta, and in-game could possibly work the same; instead of radar getting a British heal? I honestly don't know for this one, tell me what you think they could do for this series of ships.
  24. Hello all, When I started playing this game in earnest about two years ago I started with the RN cruiser line. I was attracted to this line partly for the smoke and historical value (loved the ROF too). RN cruisers even before the smoke nerf were probably the most unforgiving to new players. I got tired of being squishy, stopped at the Neptune and migrated to other lines that did not depend on smoke so heavily for survival. But while playing up to the Neptune over several months I began to notice how much more effective players became at countering my smoke. And it didn’t seem to matter much if I smoked in open water or behind an island. Standard smoke play for RN cruisers means you smoke up while undetected, deploy hydro and then fire on enemy ships and reap profits. Lately, even in my destroyers players are hitting my ship reliably in smoke while angled or moving back and forth. Combine that with the inevitable torpedoes players send to smoke, Hydro, RADAR, spotter plane and the smoke firing detection nerf and what exactly is the point anymore? Smoke has kind of become a liability. On DDs and CA/CLs that can take anything else in the smoke slot (TRB/RADAR) I take that instead. I have exhausted all mitigation efforts to not get hit in smoke. Smoke screens just don’t seem to matter most times. My theory is that smoke was nerfed right around the time the player base skill had become good enough to overcome the advantages of smoke anyway. Ranked season at T7 with the Belfast fiasco had taught everyone how to deal with smoke ships. Nerfing smoke when WG did only served to further weaken ships that depended on it for survival. Players that experienced Ranked that season came away with new tactics, techniques and procedures to successfully prosecute ships in smoke while players that did not participate were in for a rude surprise if they deployed smoke without factoring in lessons learned. At this point in the game veteran player retention seems to be at an all-time high so this knowledge has been retained. Combine those experiences with the natural progression of player skill at high tier and we start looking at the final nail in the coffin for smoke play. Even I can reliably hit ships in smoke now and I am an average player. I think the solution is that WG should look at evolving the smoke mechanic to reflect the new realities of player skill if they want it to be a useful consumable. Creeping smoke on the Haida and Cossack is a good start but a smoke refresh is overdue. The legendary smoke upgrade for the Minotaur hasn’t been deployed in battle in enough numbers yet for me to form an opinion on that. For clarification, I am not advocating we go back to the days where people could smoke right in front of you and farm you to death but I think we need a change. I know my experiences may be subjective but lately I have seen many players eschew smoke for anything else. Do you think smoke should evolve to match current player skill/meta? Do you think smoke was nerfed too much? Please let me know your observations. Thanks.
  25. TheDgamesD

    Battle of Espero Convoy

    The Battle of the Espero Convoy (Battaglia del convoglio Espero) on 28 June 1940, was the first surface engagement between Italian and Allied warships of the Second World War. Three modern 36 kn (41 mph; 67 km/h) Italian destroyers made a run from Taranto for Tobruk in Libya to transport Blackshirt (Milizia Volontaria per la Sicurezza Nazionale) anti-tank units, in case of a British tank attack from Egypt. By coincidence, the Mediterranean Fleet was at sea to conduct a destroyer anti-submarine sweep around Crete and provide cover for three Allied convoys to Egypt, one from Turkey and two from Malta. British aircraft from Malta spotted the Italian destroyers and the 7th Cruiser Squadron turned to intercept them and a running fight took place south-west of Crete, in which the destroyers were impeded by their cargoes and an adverse sea. The Italian destroyer Espero (Capitano di Vascello Enrico Baroni) was sunk while covering the escape of Zeffiro and Ostro to Benghazi; 53 of the 225 crew and passengers were rescued, three of whom died of their wounds. The British and Australian cruisers expended a huge amount of ammunition and the Malta convoys had to be postponed until they had replenished from the 800 6-inch shells in reserve. Convoy AS 1 from Turkey arrived safely by 3 July. On 10 June 1940, Italy declared war on Britain and France. Comando Supremo (Italian Supreme Command of the armed forces) expected a British advance into Cyrenaica (eastern Libya) led by armored forces. An anti-tank unit comprising 162 gunners, ten anti-tank guns and 120 short tons (110 t) of ammunition was ordered to Tobruk by a fast destroyer convoy. On 27 June, five destroyers were to sail from Alexandria on an anti-submarine sweep near the Ionian island of Kythira and them sail on to Malta to form the close escort for convoys MF 1 and MS 2 to Alexandria. Intelligence about Italian submarines led to the sweep being diverted through the Kasos Strait east of Crete, then north of the island, thence past Kythira to Malta. Short Sunderland flying boats of 201 Group RAF, based in Malta, were to co-operate with the naval operations in the Ionian Sea. On the Italian declaration of war, the passenger liner El Nil, en route for Egypt from Marseilles, Knight of Malta and interned Italian ship Rodi were in Malta and in Operation MA 3 these ships formed the fast convoy MF 1 [13 kn (15 mph; 24 km/h)]. Five slower ships, Zeeland, Kirkland, Masirah, Novasli and Tweed carrying naval stores for Alexandria, formed the slow convoy MS 1 [9 kn (10 mph; 17 km/h)] were to depart from Malta for Alexandria. MF 1 carried civilians being evacuated from Malta and all of the Mediterranean Fleet was to sortie to protect them in Operation MA 5. Convoy AS1, with seven ships, was to sail from the Dardanelles to Egypt, with four ships joining from Salonika, Piraeus and Smyrna (İzmir), escorted by the light cruisers HMS Capetown and Caledon of the 3rd Cruiser Squadron and the destroyers HMS Garland, Nubian, Mohawk and Vampire, due to depart from Cape Helles early on 28 June. The timing of the departures was arranged so that on 30 June the three convoys would be at Position K (35°N, 22°E), south of Cape Matapan, about halfway between Malta and Alexandria. Five cruisers of the 7th Cruiser Squadron (also known as Force C, Vice-Admiral John Tovey) with the 1st Cruiser Division, the Leander class cruisers (eight 6-inch guns) HMS Orion (flagship), Neptune, HMAS Sydney and the 2nd Cruiser Division, the Town (Gloucester) class cruisers (twelve 6-inch guns) Liverpool and Gloucester, were to sail west of Crete near Position K. The 1st Battle Squadron (Rear-Admiral Henry Pridham-Wippell) with HMS Royal Sovereign Ramillies, the aircraft carrier HMS Eagle and the 2nd Destroyer Flotilla, were to be south-west of Crete also near Position K, ready to intervene according to circumstances. At 6:00 p.m. on 26 June, Caledon, Garland and Vampire sailed from Alexandria to rendezvous with Capetown, Nubian and Mohawk the next day while heading for the Dardanelles. A dawn on 27 June, five ships of the 2nd Destroyer Flotilla departed Alexandria and at 11:00 a.m., the 7th Cruiser Squadron left for Position K. The Italians chose the Turbine-class destroyers Espero (flagship, Capitano di Vascello Enrico Baroni), Zeffiro and Ostro to transport the anti-tank units, for their high speed [36 kn (41 mph; 67 km/h)] and loading capacity. Two smaller First World War era escort vessels, Pilo and Giuseppe Missori, which carried 52 troops and additional supplies, departed independently for Tobruk some hours later. As the sun set, the 2nd Destroyer Flotilla of Voyager, Dainty, Decoy, Defender and Ilex were 200 nmi (230 mi; 370 km) north of Alexandria. At 6:28 p.m. while 100 nmi (115 mi; 185 km) south-east of Crete, the flotilla spotted a submarine, Console Generale Liuzzi, which quickly dived. Four of the destroyers made depth-charge attacks and after the fifth an oil slick was seen and trailed by Dainty. The submarine had been badly damaged by the depth charging and was eventually forced to the surface. After a hunt of ninety minutes the submarine was seen again at 2,500 yd (2,300 m) and two destroyers fired on the submarines until a white light was taken to indicate a surrender. Dainty moved closer and began to take on survivors, along with other destroyers which lowered boats to pick up the Italians who had taken to the water. Three hours fifteen minutes lapsed before the last two men from the submarine were taken off and the boat sunk with depth charges. The Italian destroyers were spotted at 12:10 p.m. by a 228 Squadron Sunderland (L.5806) from Malta, about 50 nmi (58 mi; 93 km) west of Zakynthos in the Ionian Sea, west of Greece and about 150 nmi (173 mi; 278 km) from Position K. No course was given by the Sunderland crew and the Italian ships were thought to be heading for Kythira; at 4:10 p.m. the 7th Cruiser squadron turned north to intercept the Italian ships. At 4:40 p.m. a sighting by Sunderland (L.5803) had them still heading south, about 35 nmi (40 mi; 65 km) from Orion. Tovey ordered a turn to the south-west and an increase in speed to 25 kn (29 mph; 46 km/h). The cruisers sailed on a course of 180°, the 1st Cruiser Division, Orion, Neptune and Sydney to overhaul the Italians to starboard and the 2nd Cruiser Division, about 5 nmi (6 mi; 9 km) apart from Liverpool and Manchester to overtake them to port. The Italian destroyers were steaming south-east at high speed when they were spotted by Liverpool at 6:30 p.m., about 100 nmi (120 mi; 190 km) north of Tobruk; the cruiser commenced firing three minutes later at 18,000 yd (8.9 nmi; 10 mi; 16 km). The Italian ships had the notional speed to outrun the cruisers but their age, heavy loads and the sea state meant that the British ships slowly caught up. The Italians had been taken by surprise and could not launch torpedoes because of their deck cargoes but they were difficult to hit as they made smoke, darkness gathered and the ships sailed towards the afterglow of the sun. At 7:05 p.m. Neptune reported torpedoes and the British ships changed course to comb the spread. The 2nd Cruiser Division concentrated on Espero and by 7:20 p.m. had closed the range to 14,000 yd (7 nmi; 8 mi; 13 km) and the 1st Division turned 50° to starboard to bring all their turrets to bear ("opening 'A' arcs") but Espero was not hit until the fifteenth salvo. Baroni realized that his faster ships were doomed and decided to sacrifice Espero to enable the other two to escape, laid smoke and maneuvered evasively as Zeffiro and Ostro raced south-west. At 8:00 p.m. Espero was hit and brought to a stop. As night was falling and short of ammunition, Tovey abandoned the chase ten minutes later and changed course for Malta. Tovey ordered Sydney to finish off Espero and when at 6,000 yd (3 nmi; 3 mi; 5 km) received two shells from Espero and replied with four salvos, scoring hits. Espero began to burn from the bow to midships and at 8:35 p.m., Sydney closed to 2,000 yd (1,829 m) astern of the destroyer. Men jumped from the burning ship and there was an explosion near the bridge. At 8:40 p.m., with a list of almost 90°, Espero sank at 35° 18' N; 20° 8' E. Sydney lowered both of its boats to rescue survivors and used Jacob's ladders and Bosun's chairs to bring them aboard. The glare from Espero before it sank and the presence of Italian submarines led to the rescue effort being ended at 10:19 p.m. when all 47 survivors in sight had been collected. before Sydney sailed away, one of the cutters with oars, sails, foodstuffs, water and rifles was left behind and with a signal projector illuminated so that remaining survivors could board it. Three of the survivors died before the ship reached Alexandria and six others were found alive on a raft by the Italian submarine Topazio fourteen days later. At dawn, the 2nd Destroyer Flotilla was 160 nmi (184 mi; 296 km) west of Crete when the submarine Uebi Scebeli was caught on the surface. The submarine dived and was depth charged by three of the destroyers which forced Uebi Scebeli to the surface, where survivors were rescued. Dainty sank the submarine with gunfire at 8:20 am.; the destroyers made for Alexandria, arriving at about 7:00 p.m. on 30 June. Information was gleaned from the prisoners, of a submarine patrol line between Crete and the African coast; two destroyers were dispatched from Alexandria on an anti-submarine sortie near Derna, detected a submerged submarine on 1 July and claimed its sinking, although this was disproved when the ships returned on 2 July. Zeffiro and Ostro had reached Benghazi on 29 June and arrived at Tobruk shortly after; two-thirds of the convoy had survived. The smaller Pilo and Missori also reached Libya after being diverted to the port of Tripoli. The engagement had lasted for about 130 minutes and the 7th Cruiser Squadron fired about 5,000 shells. An Italian 4.7 in (120 mm) shell hit Liverpool 3 ft (0.91 m) above the waterline but caused little damage. Some of the prisoners on Sydney disclosed the purpose of the operation, that Espero had a company of 225 men and passengers embarked and that Baroni had been killed in the explosion near the bridge. The ammunition consumption of the British cruisers exacerbated a shortage of ammunition at Alexandria, where only 800 6-inch shells were in stock. The Battle of the Espero Convoy demonstrated that a daylight naval action at long range was likely to be indecisive and extravagant of ammunition. The 2nd Cruiser Division was so short of ammunition that it returned to Alexandria and the Malta convoys were postponed. The 1st Cruiser Division reached Alexandria on 1 July, having also been ineffectually bombed. Convoy AS 1 from the Aegean was attacked from 29 June to 1 July by Italian aircraft based in the Dodecanese Islands but reached Alexandria and Port Said undamaged on 2 and 3 July. In 1998, Green and Massignani wrote that had Italian aircraft spotted the Allied cruisers before they came within range, all three destroyers could have escaped. Baroni was posthumously awarded the Medaglia D´oro Al Valor Militare. The lack of ammunition and the danger of Italian submarines, led to the two Malta convoy sailings being postponed for two weeks, followed by Operation MF 5, culminating in the Battle of Punta Stilo (9 July 1940). On 5 July, nine Fairey Swordfish torpedo-bombers of 813 Naval Air Squadron, Fleet Air Arm flew from Sidi Barrani near the Egypt–Libya frontier, to attack the ships in Tobruk harbour. Twelve fighters of 33 Squadron covered the Swordfish and 211 Squadron attacked the airfield, damaged eight Fiat CR.42 fighters and flew reconnaissance sorties. The Swordfish dropped seven torpedoes in the harbour, sank Zeffiro and damaged the destroyer Euro; the merchantmen Manzoni and Serenitas were also sunk and the liner Liguria was damaged. On the evening after the attack on Tobruk, 830 Naval Air Squadron from Malta bombed the airfield at Catania in Sicily. Capetown and Caledon of the 3rd Cruiser Squadron with four destroyers, bombarded the port Bardia from 9,000 yd (5.1 mi; 8.2 km) at dawn on 6 July and hit two ships, before making ready to assist the crews of any aircraft damaged on the Tobruk raid; Italian aircraft attacked the ships to no effect. The guns of Zeffiro were salvaged from the harbour and sent to Bardia to augment the coastal defences.