Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'battlecruiser'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Volunteer Programs
  • Feedback and Support
    • Game Support and Bug Reporting
    • Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • External testing groups
    • Supertest Academy
    • Supertest
    • Clantest

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Discord


Twitter


Website URL


Instagram


YouTube


Twitch


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 25 results

  1. The Japanese battleship line is one of the oldest ship lines in the game. It has been power crept, and hasn't been touched in years, other than some slight balance changes. I propose the split of it into 2 lines, a battleship line, and a fast battleship/battlecruiser line. I propose this split happens at T6. T5 - Kongo REEEEEE BUT KONGO ISN'T T6 YOU LIED Kongo will be the branch off point for these 2 lines. The 1st line, battleships, will come from the hull upgrade. The 2nd line, battlecruisers, will come from the engine upgrade. T6 Fuso/ T7 Nagato/T9 Izumo Fuso and Nagato will be the 1st and 2nd ships of the BB subbranch. Basically nothing will change for them. Izumo will be a smoother transition into Yamato with our new T8... T8 Tosa Finally, a new ship. Tosa will replace Amagi in the battleship branch as the new T8 battleship. She is very similar to Amagi, as the latter was basically a lengthened version of the former. Tosa's stats will be similar to Amagi's, with the primary differences being a larger HP pool, slower speed, and a reinforced armor belt. She will also have slightly stronger secondaries (having more of them) but slightly worse AA. Essentially, the battleship line replace Amagi with Tosa (as IMO it always should have been), but little else has change for them. Now, for the battlecruiser line, we're bringing back a familiar friend from the Arpeggio of Blue Steel series... T6 Haruna BUT FRANK HARUNA IS A KONGO CLONE YOU CAN'T DO THAT True. Haruna, when stock, will basically be Kongo with improved stats. However, this Haruna isn't the same ship as Kirishima and Hiei who got lambasted at Guadalcanal. No, this is a battle hardened veteran (albeit archaic), with slightly better reload, a little more HP, and a bit more accurate. Anyways, I needed an excuse to put a buffed Kongo at T6. We will give her Speed Boost, as will we give all the ships of this new BB line. This brings us to her upgraded hull. No longer is the Kongo class stuck with Kongo B Hull, you now can enjoy historical accuracy with your 1945 hull (ignore the Russian ships and fantasy paper boats). This will give you better AA (you can actually shoot stuff down now) and more health. T7 Sakurajima Meet the B61 class battlecruiser. I would like to thank the following post for much of the information and name http://www.shipbucket.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=10380 The guns are labeled 3-Y, implying 3rd Year 16 inch, however they are labeled 14 inch. WG could execute this either way, or even make the 16 inch guns a trade off module (longer reload, more damage/pen). As far as I can tell, and from what the sources tell me, this was meant to be an interim between Kongo/Nagato and Amagi. may or may not have turtlebaka, can't tell. She would play like a cross between Haruna and Amagi, leaning more depending on which guns were selected. B Hull will be a hypothetical refit (WG could make something up). Alternatively, there were plans for B-65 cruiser with 14 inch guns. This would be Azuma with 14 inch guns at T7. T8 Amagi You already know what goes here. Will receive speed boost, but will lose some health as a result. T9 Suruga What do you mean I can't buff Kii and put her here? How bout I do anyways. Suruga (stole name from Azur Lane) will be very similar to Kii, being the same class. The A hull is basically Kii, but with more health. The B hull will have her adding more AA, removal of the remaining casemate guns, more health, and a large helping of 100mm guns. T10 Yashima I have 2 proposals, the name is a placeholder because I was too lazy to research the internal structure of Japanese provinces The Project 13 battleship had many different proposal. This one has 8 18 inch guns (most likely 460). The class was to have a speed of 30 knots and a 330mm belt. Turtlebaka armor The 2nd one is design A-120. She would be a bit weaker, only having a 229mm belt and displacing much less. She also only has 410mm guns, so no overmatch. This drawing is of the 1916 version, if she was actually built, she would have been modernized considerably. Maybe a Kongo style refit for more armor or a Guilio Cesare type refit giving up a turret for more speed and secondary/AA power. also has turtlebaka Now this wouldn't be a new line without a premium, so I give you... T9 Settsu Like Georgia? Well then you'll love Settsu, clocking in at 37 knots. Her firepower is 2/3 of a Musashi with Georgia'd reload. She has a secondary gimmick with improved dispersion. She explodes when lightly tapped by shells. Thin armor belt, would get slapped. Settsu is the Battleship O project for the 8-8 plan. She would have poor AA, but would be able to drift around the opponents with a maximum speed of 39.96 knots using her speed boost (I gave her normal, 15% would have been insane). Vulnerable to HE spam and overmatch, but has the IJN turtlebaka armor for some trolling if you aim too high. Would love to hear your thoughts for this proposal
  2. LittleWhiteMouse

    Premium Ship Review - Repulse

    The following review of Repulse, the tier VI premium British battleship, was sponsored by my patrons on Patreon who helped me afford this ship. To the best of my knowledge, the statistics discussed in this review are current as patch 0.10.11. Please be aware that her performance may change in the future. I've had my head down for over a month, working on a handful of projects (including, but not limited to tier VIII submarines, tier VI carriers and updating my databases). However, even I've noticed the growing hype surrounding HMS Repulse and it's prompted me to throw this together. There's good reason that Repulse is creating a lot of noise. I played the Hell out of her back earlier this year when she was in testing. She was a monster then. She's a monster now. To be clear, Wargaming has nerfed her since I was testing her. The following changes were made: Her reload time was nerfed from 26 seconds to 27 seconds. Engine Boost's speed increase dropped from 15% down to 10% down to 8% (from ~36.5 knots down to it's current ~34.3 knots when the consumable is active) Her main battery rotation rate was buffed from 3.33º/s to 6º/s. Having taken her out again (yes, I whaled all the way up to Marlborough for this review -- thank you, patrons!), this hasn't been enough to tone Repulse down. And, as this review will detail, I'm expecting her to receive another round of nerfs once the population at large gets a hold of her. For those tempted to throw money at guaranteeing getting a hold of her, this may be reason for caution. No one wants a ship they spent time and money on to get nerfed out from under them. So, let's get stuck in on why I see Repulse as being a potential problem vessel that Wargaming will have to reign in with future patches. Quick Summary: A soft-skinned battlecruiser (with surprisingly trollish durability) that has incredible speed and accuracy. PROS Long ranged with a 19.76km reach which can be further boosted with a Spotter Aircraft. She uses Graf Spee (battlecruiser) dispersion combined with 2.0 sigma, giving her excellent accuracy. Her 381mm guns can overmatch up to 26mm of armour with AP shells. Her 381mm guns have 95mm of HE penetration. Decent fire angles and good gun handling. Fast reload at 27 seconds. VERY fast with a top speed of 31.7 knots. Has access to an Engine Boost consumable. Her Repair Party queues up 60%/33% of penetration/citadel damage. CONS Soft skinned structurally, with only 16mm of extremity armour (!) Thin belt of only 229mm. Main battery is only six guns which makes RNG feel more punitive. Only modest AP penetration and inability to overmatch 27mm+ hull sections. Terrible anti-aircraft firepower. Enormous turning circle radius of 860m. Only three charges base on her Repair Party. Overview Skill Floor: Simple / CASUAL / Challenging / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / HIGH / Extreme Repulse's appeal for new players is the simplicity of her main battery firepower. Her guns are long ranged and accurate. Her ammunition choices are simplified too, with newer players able to spam either AP or HE and generate reasonable results (though AP is preferred). The two strikes against her for inexperienced players are her speed (which can get her into trouble with over-extending) and her soft protection scheme. These will both spake people who like to play aggressively. However, a cautious player won't struggle overmuch with either one of these problems. For veterans, Repulse is a kiting-daemon. You have the speed. You have the stealth. You have the range. You have the accuracy. You have the overmatch. Play keep away and farm damage like a boss. Options Repulse's consumables stand out while the rest is fairly standard. Consumables Her Damage Control Party doesn't have anything unusual about it and is normal for a British battleship. It is active for 15 seconds and it has an 80 second reset timer. It has unlimited charges. It's her Repair Party which is unusual. While it does heal up to the standard 14% of her starting HP over 28 seconds (with an 80 second reset timer), like other British battleship, it queues up to 60% of penetration damage received instead of the usual 50% for most other nations. In addition, Repulse queues up to 33% of citadel damage too. However, unlike most battleships, Repulse only starts with three charges instead of four. We go back to normalcy with her Spotter Aircraft. This increases her range by 20% (up to 23.71km) for 100 seconds. It has a 240 second reset timer and it comes with four charges. Finally, she gets access to a unique Engine Boost consumable. This provides an 8% speed increase for 180 seconds with only a 90 second reset timer. Repulse comes with three charges. Upgrades Start your upgrades with Main Armaments Modification 1. Next up, if you can afford it you should definitely grab Engine Boost Modification 1 from the Armory for 17,000 . This increases the action time of your Engine Boost consumable from 180 seconds to a whopping 234 seconds. If you can't, default to Damage Control System Modification 1. Aiming System Modification 1 is the only upgrade worth considering in slot three. In slot four, you have the choice. Because of her vulnerability to fires, Damage Control System Modification 1 is arguably optimal. However, expert players may want to swap that out for Steering Gears Modification 1 to help with kiting at very long ranges. Commander Skills I wish I could tell you that it was worth having a unique commander for Repulse, if only to make things more interesting. However, you really can't go wrong with a standard battleship build that you're going to use for the British battleship tech tree line. It should look something like this: You're not going to need Grease the Gears given Repulse's very fast turret traverse, so I suppose that's kinda nice. But given that you probably picked it up to help with some of the awful traverse rates found on the rest of the Royal Navy line, it's not the end of the world. I much prefer Priority Target, but that's a personal bias. Camouflage Repulse comes with two camouflages, Type 10 and Snows and Stars. These are cosmetic swaps of one another with the following stats: -3% surface detection +4% increased dispersion of enemy shells. -10% to post-battle service costs. +50% to experience gains. Her basic Type 10 camouflage. If this looks familiar, it's because the devs gave it to HMS Hood for some reason. You can unlock this palette swap of her Type 10 camouflage by completing part of the "Naval Aviation" collection. The Snow and Stars camouflage is pretty terrible. Firepower Main Battery: 3x2 381mm/45 guns in an A-B-X superfiring configuration Secondary Battery: Fifteen 102mm/45 guns with nine in 3x3 turrets with a pair straddling the first funnel and the final one superfiring over X-turret and then six single guns with three to each side. Let me get Repulse's secondaries out of the way first: They're terrible. She doesn't have enough of them, they're not accurate and they don't hit especially hard. The only thing decent about them is their range. Do not sink any upgrades, signals or skills into these things. Moving on. Repulse has some of the best, tier VI battleship main battery firepower. Here's why: Battlecruiser Dispersion + 2.0 sigma Nearly 20km worth of range 27 second reload 381mm AP shells with 26mm overmatching 95mm of HE penetration Good gun fire angles with 6º/s gun rotation But she only has six guns, Mouse, you might say. And you're correct to be wary of small gun armaments on battleships. Having only six guns means that Repulse has smaller alpha strike potential and lower DPM than her contemporaries (even with her faster reload time). This spills over to her fire-chance as well, making her one of the worst at her tier. One of the less appreciate drawbacks of smaller main battery armaments is that RNG feels more punitive with fewer guns. When firing with larger broadsides, having a pair of shells scatter wide is annoying but less impactful than it is for Repulse where every shell counts. The quality of her individual hits is an issue too. Repulse does not boast the high-performance Royal Navy HE shells, but rather a chimaera that uses the more modest baseline stats from HMS Hood (lower damage, lower fire chance) yet maintains the 1/4 HE penetration from Queen Elizabeth (95mm of penetration instead of 64mm). So her HE alpha strikes aren't terribly impressive and she's a poor fire starter. Repulse's HE would be largely forgettable were it not for the issues with her AP rounds which will force you to still use HE on occasion. Though the Royal Navy 381mm AP shells are capable of overmatching most targets up to tier VII, that doesn't quite reach the 27mm+ threshold found on many higher-tiered cruisers and battleships. Additionally, their penetration values are only good at medium to close-range and they're largely incapble of dealing with battleship belt armour at distances in excess of 14km. This complicates Repulse's gunnery if you're looking to maximize its efficiency, requiring that you aim more carefully, choose the correct ammunition and pick your targets. Thus, when Repulse is top-tier on those smaller, claustrophobic maps, her guns (specifically her AP shells) are much more impressive. When bottom tier, their efficiency falls away. Yet conscious of these drawbacks, the only other guns at tier VI I'd rather have are the 406mm off West Virginia '41 and I only say that by the slimmest of margins. Repulse's guns are hella-comfortable to use. Aim well, and you'll hit what you shoot at. Pick the correct ammo and aim at the right hull locations and you'll see consistent damage. What's more, between the ship's gun handling, long range and high speed, these guns are excellent for over-the-shoulder kiting, taking steady bites out of your opponents. Woe betide the cruiser that flashes broadside to Repulse up to (and including 20km) ranges. She can (and will) punish careless players spectacularly. Graphic dump time! Here's the bad news. In terms of raw numbers, Repulse's six guns just don't cut it, even with their faster reload. This doesn't tell the whole story though. You have to keep shell performance (penetration, overmatch) and accuracy in mind. Andrea Doria is the only tier VI battleship using SAP on the right graph. It's the same news when you look at her fire setting potential. It's not great but her accuracy helps ensure she gets more hits than these raw numbers would otherwise indicate. Royal Navy 381mm AP penetration obviously improves as you climb the tiers, but it's not exactly an impressive round when it comes to penetration. You want well in excess of 350mm of penetration to contend with most battleship belts (allowing your rounds to defealt some angling). Repulse doesn't have this until you get 14km or closer. Compare Repulse's dispersion (blue, on the left) with Ise's dispersion (peach, on the right). Both ships have 2.0 sigma. Repulse's battlecruiser dispersion gives her a tighter overall dispersion area, making those central-landing shells pack in even closer. Still, if you manage 25% accuracy in Fuso, you'd need to managed roughly 45% or better to keep pace with Repulse; which is a pretty tall order. The alternative is to get her guns in action for longer to compensate, and that relies on good positioning and survivability. Very comfy fire angles paired with a very fast (for a battleship) gun traverse speed gives Repulse brilliant gun handling. VERDICT: Their excellent accuracy and overmatch potential makes them deadly. Kite and kill. Durability Hit Points: 56,100 Bow & stern/superstructure/upper-hull/deck: 16mm / 16mm / 38mm / 26mm Maximum Citadel Protection: 26mm anti-torpedo bulge + 229mm belt + 102mm citadel turtleback. Torpedo Damage Reduction: 16% I've removed Repulse's 26mm anti-torpedo bulges to reveal the 229mm belt armour underneath. Note that normal tier VI battleships have 26mm extremities. Repulse has ... issues. I suppose it's kinda fluffy that a British battlecruiser has durability problems. In Repulse's case, this comes from two sources: Her extremities are VERY soft. Her citadel is vulnerable to overmatching from 380mm calibre guns or greater. The 16mm bow and stern sections of Repulse's armour makes her vulnerable, not just to AP overmatch (which I'll get into) but all calibres of HE rounds as well. Repulse's extremities and superstructure can be penetrated by HE rounds of 96mm or greater. So not only is every destroyer out there very happy to make your acquaintance, even the small calibre secondary guns off a lot of battleships are capable of plinking some damage off your soft snoot and butt. Combined with Repulse's horrid anti-torpedo protection, getting in close to enemy lolibotes is generally a terrible idea unless you're particularly good at blapping them with your main battery guns. Note that this issue isn't unique to her. Other tier VI and VII battleships may also contend with small calibre HE shells doing damage to them, but normally, the offending vessel must have the Inertial Fuse for HE Shells commander skill to do so. So from an HE perspective, Repulse's extremities are a weakness but not a glaring one. That actually carries through when you look deeper into her AP protection. While her 16mm extremities look like huge weak points, there's hidden armour geometry that prevents these from becoming an automatic pass to her citadel. To be clear: Repulse still takes massive amounts of penetration damage through her butt or snoot, but it's not always going to be catastrophic citadel hits. Repulse has a lot of these hidden armour plates, including a 76mm turtleback along the interior of her anti-torpedo protection and hidden decks. While Repulse's citadel is still vulnerable, the slope of her turtleback is enough to prompt (though not guarantee) ricochet checks for shells fired at close range, giving her some rather trollish survivability at times. Hits from further out are a much greater danger in this regard, but thanks to her agility and speed, these are easier to avoid. Still, playing catch with large-gunned battleships is generally a bad idea in Repulse. It's best to break contact or Just Dodge™ until you can disengage. Though Repulse is capable of recovering up to 33% of citadel hits (be they from bomb, shell or torpedo), it's not something you want to fall back on. It's not all doom and gloom here, though. Extremities asside, Repulse's amidships hull cannot be overmatched. If you can bait shots here while angled, she can ricochet and shatter stuff for days. Similarly, while she may have fewer charges of her Repair Party, she still retains that Royal Navy 60% penetration damage queue, on top of that 33% citadel damage queue I mentioned before. So clever play can help mitigate this damage, particularly if you fight at a distance to give yourself more time to avoid return fire. The 25mm armour plate over Repulse's machine spaces and the 26mm citadel wall is a big weakness against 380mm+ AP rounds which can overmatch. From gamemodels3d.com. The arrow is pointing to the hidden 102mm v-shaped plate protecting Repulse from overmatching AP rounds. This links up to the fore-end armour belt which is visible in port. Repulse's effective hit point pool looks pretty average. Her 60% penetration damage queue and 33% citadel damage queue does allow her to make better use of her Repair Party than the ships like Dunkerque through Mackensen. Unfortunately, she's only working with four charges of her Repair Party which gives her less overall health than her hit points would otherwise suggest. VERDICT: Bad, but not like "historical British battlecruiser" bad. Agility Top Speed: 31.7 knots Turning Radius: 860 meters Rudder Shift Time: 14.4 seconds 4/4 Engine Speed Rate of Turn: 4.3º/s at 23.7kts Main Battery Traverse Rate: 6.0º/s Repulse's turn radius is bad and her rudder shift time isn't good either, but thanks to being able to overtop 30 knots in a straight line, her rate of turn isn't horrid (but I wouldn't call it anything more than average). Though she needs a lot of room to come about, she doesn't take forever to do it, so that's nice. Better still, with her excellent turret traverse rates, she can't out-turn her guns which is a novelty for British battleships. High speed solves a lot of issues, though it's not without its own set of troubles. Repulse is made to kite and control the engagement distances. Between her own high top speed and her Engine Boost consumable, she's more than capable of outrunning just about any threat she faces (or running it down for that matter). Stack this onto her good main battery gun range, decent fire angles and her not-terrible concealment values and you would struggle to find a battleship better suited to dictating when she gets spotted by her opponents short of the smoke-on-demand Italian designs. On paper, she is theoretically capable of playing keep-away to such a degree that she should be capable of mitigating any of the aforementioned durability issues raised earlier. However, the reality is that her tier bites her in the butt. As nice as Repulse's top speed is, lower-tiered maps are often too claustrophobic for her to make proper use of it defensively. So while her offensive power shoots up when she's top tier, her defensive attribute granted by her speed is compromised to a degree. This can be mitigated somewhat by choosing where to fight, ensuring you have enough open water to take full advantage of her speed, but this does limit some corridors through which she can fight and avoid damage. This is much less of an issue on mid-to-high tier maps when facing against tier VII and VIII opponents. This is, in of itself, a mixed blessing given the increase of larger calibre battleship guns at these tiers, to say nothing of the reduced efficiency of her own 381mm battery. The final issue with her speed is that it's far too easy to over-extend in Repulse. Though she's fast enough to disengage, she's also fast enough to be the first ship spotted if you're not careful. Note that Novorossiysk is not included here. I did not have her unlocked to confirm her in-port turning data when I made this graphic. I have her now, but I'm not redoing this! VERDICT: I love her speed and I'll overlook her other agility woes because of it. Anti-Aircraft Defence Flak Bursts: 1 explosion for 980 damage per blast at 3.5km to 4km Long Ranged (up to 4km): 28 dps at 75% accuracy (21 dps) Medium Ranged (up to 2.5km): 140 dps at 75% accuracy (105 dps) Short Ranged (up to 2.0km): 105 dps at 70% accuracy (73.5 dps) I'm not going to dwell on Repulse's anti-aircraft firepower very long. It's awful; some of the worst at her tier. All of her damage is focused around her 40mm pom poms and 20mm Oerlikon batteries which can only shoot when aircraft are on their final attack run. Thus, they're best described as a "revenge weapons", where any damage you're doing is after already suffering from the CV's predations. While this may end up netting you a kill or two against tier VI aircraft, Repulse stands no chance at dissuading the attentions of a tier VIII carrier. You're never going to deplane a CV with Repulse unless they deliberately orbit around your ship for minutes at a time. Though, this said, it's not like any of the tier VI battleships are particularly fearsome when it comes to their AA defense. Most are just practice targets for even mid-tier CVs. Thus, Repulse has to stick with her allies to have any hope of keeping CV-safe. This runs contrary to her preferred playstyle though -- where she takes up a flank and snipes. This leaves her dangerously vulnerable to aircraft attack. I suppose that's historically accurate and all but it makes for crappy game play whenever a CV is present and intent on ruining your day. VERDICT: Terrible. Just like the state of low-tier surface ship interaction with aircraft. Repulse's AA is so crappy, I couldn't even shoot down this single Bf 109 that didn't even know how to raise its landing gear. Vision Control Base/Minimum Surface Detection: 14.4km / 12.57km Base/Minimum Air Detection Range: 9.62km / 8.66km Detection Range When Firing in Smoke: 13.19km Maximum Firing Range: Between 19.76 and 23.71km when using her Spotter Aircraft Repulse pairs average visibility with excellent range. Combined with her accuracy over distance and her great top speed, Repulse feels far stealthier than her visibility attributes would otherwise indicate. It's only the presence of aircraft, submarines or aggressive destroyers that easily sniff her out. While a quick scan of the enemy roster will give an indication of how effective Repulse's ability to control engagement distances, the size of the map matters a lot as well. The ballistics of her guns do allow her to make use of island cover to a degree (though nowhere near as effectively as a cruiser might), these same islands can be her bane, concealing spotting elements and limiting her ability to kite effectively. Open water is truly where her home is and being able to dictate the range between herself and her chosen target is her bread and butter. VERDICT: Unremarkable concealment but good enough to make use of her speed and range. Anti-Submarine Warfare ASW Armament Type: Airstrike from 1.5km to 8km (plus bomb drop column) Number of Salvos: Up to two Reload Time: 75 seconds Aircraft: Two S.25 Sunderlands with 2,000hp per plane. Drop Pattern: 4 bombs each dropped evenly over roughly a 1.75km column Maximum Bomb Damage: 3,000 Fire Chance: 12% Nothing written here is going to last. We've already received word that with patch 0.11.0, ASW is changing significantly. I'm merely recording this for posterity -- Repulse's anti-submarine airstrikes were pretty good. Without knowing how the bomb blast radius is changing, I can't say for certain, but from the looks of the devblog, submarines are getting a whole lot more survivable against not only battleship airstrikes but gunnery as well. I'm taking you with me! Final Evaluation Repulse comes with a pretty hefty pricetag. If you don't want to participate in any of the dockyard missions, you're looking at a minimum cost of 20,400 doubloons. Alternatively, you can spend the dozens upon dozens of hours grinding to unlock her. If you're already planning to spend a lot of time playing World of Warships this holiday season, you can probably unlock her for free. Just be aware that this is a time commitment and any stages you're missing towards the Dockyard event's end will set you back 1,500 doubloons per. Repulse has a nominal value of 6,800 doubloons (including a port slot) -- so if you're shelling out more than for five stages, it's not worth the dollarydoos. Repulse is a great ship. She carries on the trend Wargaming has had as of late to reduce the theoretical damage output. In terms of balance, I think Wargaming's close, but I'm foreseeing this ship getting hit with the nerf hammer again before 2022 is out. A 28 second or even as much as a 30 second reload may be in the cards for this ship. It will depend how she fares in the wild in the hands of the community. I could be totally off base here, with her speed and survivability creating a perfect storm to make her newfish-bait wherein she gets herself killed way too early (and often) to bring the average score down. But it's hard for me not to see the potential here and worry. For those of you on the fence about opening your wallets, I would strongly caution you to expect the ship to get her efficiency reduced in some way. Instead of Repulse, I think the average player would do much better buying Warspite instead. Warspite trades a little main battery performance and straight-line speed for a slightly larger broadside, better secondaries (they're so good you can do a full secondary spec if you want), better armour and hit point recovery, better fire management and much (much!) better agility. Repulse goes fast and she snipes. Warspite can also snipe, though nowhere near as far. But she can brawl too. She's the better ship for all kinds of PVE engagements too if that's your thing. Repulse uptiers better, I'll give her that much, though the Grand Old Lady is no slouch. You might think Hood a better comparison to Repulse, but tier for tier, Repulse is so much better than Hood that it's no-contest. Here's the list of best to worst British battleship premium and reward ships in my opinion. Thunderer -- I'm biased. Warspite -- I'm very biased, but she's still amazing. Nelson -- ♪ Burn, baby, burn! ♫ Agincourt -- Are they ever going to sell you again? Repulse -- Repulse only rates this low because three of the above ships aren't even available anymore cuz of their performance. How bae-bote has dodged this bullet, I have no idea. Duke of York -- You're not terrible, but I hate what we had to lose to bring you into the game as you are now. Vanguard -- I hate your fire arcs, but you're better overall than Hood. Hood -- The CV rework butchered this ship. Dreadnought -- I want to rate you higher, but Wargaming has neglected low-tiers so badly that you're nothing but a bot-farmer. Marlborough -- Spoilers for my upcoming review! I'm happy to have Repulse in my port, but I am a self-avowed teaboo, so be aware of my bias. If you're a fan of historical British vessels, she's a must have and will serve you well. For anyone else, she's a good ship. Just be aware that her performance statistics aren't permanent.
  3. So over the last month and a bit I've been studiously grinding out my German tokens to unlock the new German line up to and including Prinz Heinrich and have been playing said new ships and it's led me to wonder what purpose the old German BB line will serve in the future as this new line seems superior in a lot of ways. For a direct point of comparison (because I have both), I'll point to the Gneisenau and the Prinz Heinrich: So what advantages does the Gneisenau have over Heinrich? Well, it's faster by quite a bit, it has better armour plating (thicker) and a turtleback, an extra heal, and marginally better AA. It also has faster torps and it's main guns have better ballistics due to being more modern resulting in a potentially higher Alpha. It's guns are also longer ranged, though what this is worth in a brawling ship with turtleback is debatable. What advantages does the Heinrich have over the Gneisenau? 8 guns versus 6, plus one rear gun being 360 degrees meaning you can likely always have at least 3 guns on targets. It again has older style guns with worse ballistics and raw alpha potential, but on the other hand it seems to have pretty vastly superior dispersion allowing it to reliably put 6-8 shells into targets, even without dispersion mod on them, compared to the Gneise scattershotting all over the place. It also has imo vastly superior secondaries due to them also being more accurate, so even if the Gneise has GK calibre secondaries, they do not hit the target nearly as much and I seem to get much more reliably secondary dps out of my Heinrich. On top of both of those things it has extra torpedo tubes that are much better protected and don't break, with better torp reload times and a longer range for area denial, very good main gun turret traverse speed, and, unlike Gneisenau, it still has all of that damage output plus Hydro to allow it to safely push against DDs. Oh and also don't forget Heinrich's better concealment. ______________________________________ So knowing all of that now, and having seen Potato post the sec dmg charts for Zeiten and Schlieffen and such, I'm starting to wonder what the point of the old German line is. These new German BBs are certainly squishier, but what good is being tanky when you can't put down damage enough to make your brawls worth it? These new BBs certainly do that. Even if I push in and die, I'm usually making sure 2-3 other boats die with me, and especially with Hydro and torpedoes and top tier secondaries, DDs can't just charge me without very seriously risking their own rapid deaths. And when you are waiting for the right time to push, because your dispersion isn't garbage, you can actually hit things at range and do damage! The line up to Prinz Heinrich was pretty nice, but my god she really takes it to a new level, and I assume it only gets better from here. Really the only thing I wish Heinrich had was turtleback, but with how low in the waterline its citadel is that hasn't been much of an issue anyways. It seems to me old German BBs are being power crept pretty hard and are going to need some tweaks here to be considering viable and worth playing. I say this as someone that has always loved German BBs for brawling and specifically been very fond of Gneisenau. Clearly Wargaming thinks the same with the Kurfurst being replaced by something with bigger main guns, so should the rest of the line get a similar boost?
  4. Marine_Diesel

    Mackensen-Class Battlecruiser

    Mackensen-class battlecruiser Length: 223 m (731 ft 8 in) Beam: 30.4 m (99 ft 9 in) Draft: 9.3 m (30 ft 6 in) Propulsion: 4 shaft geared steam turbines, 4 screw propellers Top speed: 28kts. The 35cm (13.78in) gun fired a slightly more aerodynamic shell compared to the Bayern's 38cm gun. L/3.6 vs L/3.5. And fired a somewhat lightweight 600kg AP shell at 815mps. Japan 14 inch gun - 1928 APC No. 6 / Type 88 - (635 kg), WWII 673.5kg and New Mex 14" fired 635.9kg shell for comparison. Mackensen could have the same 26 sec reload as Bismarck. (Listed as 2.5 RPM) Secondary armament: 14 x 15cm SK L/45 in casemates 8 x 8.8cm SK L/45 flak guns in single mounts Hopefully this will be at tier 5 like Kongo.
  5. The following is a review of both Agir & Siegfried, the tier IX German large cruisers. These ships have been provided to me by Wargaming at no cost to me (though I do have to unlock Siegfried again). To the best of my knowledge, the statistics discussed in this review are accurate as of patch 0.9.5. Please be aware that their performance may change in the future. Whoo, double-header! Wait, does this count as reviews #150 and #151? Bah, I'll figure that part out later. Welcome to my mistake! There is a lot of similarities between the two O-class sisters, but there are some marked differences too -- not the least of which is their actual game play. I've tried to separate things out to make things more readable but it's kind of a mess with all the back and forth going on. I'm worried that I've focused too hard on one ship over the other. Oh well, I committed to this folly and I'm going to ride it out to the very end! Let's begin! Agir Summary: A tier IX Odin in cruiser-form with improved main battery guns, but she has worse protection and secondaries. Siegfried Summary: A tier IX Gneisenau in cruiser-form with better guns, secondaries, torpedoes, AA power, agility and concealment. She is squishier than the tier VII battleship though. Difference Summary: Siegfried and Agir share the same protection scheme agility and concealment. However their weapons differ. Siegfried's has more powerful 380mm guns, is more accurate, has fewer but (much) longer-ranged secondaries. Agir has 305mm guns and an extra two-pairs of short-ranged secondaries and better torpedo arcs. In addition, Siegfried gets more consumables. Because reasons. SHARED PROS Strong citadel protection for a cruiser with a 190mm belt backed by an 80mm turtleback and 45mm to 60mm citadel wall. Good structural armour protection with 27mm thick extremities, 90mm thick upper hull and 30mm thick deck. Phenomenal anti-torpedo protection for a cruiser with a 37% damage reduction. Hell, most battleships would love to have this level of defense. Long ranged main battery guns (18.5km for Agir, 20.64km for Siegfried). Excellent main battery HE penetration for both ships. Secondaries have 32mm of penetration, making them capable of directly damaging the extremities of even tier VIII+ battleships. Good anti-aircraft firepower. Access to the improved German cruiser Hydroacoustic Search consumable with it's increased detection ranges of 4km for torpedoes and 6km for ships. SHARED CONS Turtleback isn't angled steeply enough to guarantee auto-ricochets, leaving their citadels potentially vulnerable. Wait, how is this a flaw, really? Most cruisers would give away their X-turret for this level of citadel defense. Agir and Siegfried's not-perfect turtleback be damned. Fires spank for a full 60s, and floods waterboard you for 40s. Kinky. Poor main battery HE DPM. Horrible main battery gun fire angles both forward and backward. Torpedoes are pathetically short-ranged at 6km. Chunktacular agility with handling for a cruiser that feels like sticking your hand in cottage cheese or duck puke. Large surface detection for a cruiser. SPECIFIC PROS Excellent AP penetration and overmatch ability with Siegfried's 380mm guns. Siegfried makes use of cruiser dispersion (!) with her battleship caliber guns. Siegfried has long range-secondaries with good fire arcs (better than Agir's for some reason). Agir has the same fire-setting ability as Azuma and Alaska with her main battery guns. SPECIFIC CONS Low AP DPM on Siegfried's guns (combined with that earlier low HE DPM). Siegfried is a bad firebug with a low fires-per-minute. Agir's main battery lacks AP penetration making it difficult to contest battleship armour except at ranges of less than 12km. Agir may have more secondaries but they too short ranged to be useful. Overview Skill Floor: Simple / CASUAL / Challenging / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / High/ EXTREME Large cruisers tend to be pretty forgiving as far as cruiser game-play goes. They borrow a lot from battleships which are some of the easiest ships to play. For beginners, Siegfried and Agir provide these training wheels along with very forgiving gunnery dispersion. For veterans, imagine German battleships that actually hit whatever you aimed at. Yeah, scary, especially in Siegfried's case. Stack onto that good survivability, brawling, kiting, DD hunting with their hydro, using islands for ambushes / cover -- yeah, there's a lot of room for skill to affect game play. Let's do these next few sections out of order and focus first on where they're similar and then touch on where they're different. Defense Hit Points: 62,850 Min Bow & Deck Armour: 27mm extremities, 90mm upper hull & 30mm deck Maximum Citadel Protection: 190mm belt + 80mm turtleback + 45mm to 60mm citadel wall. Torpedo Damage Reduction: 37% How the hell are these things balanced? Siegfried and Roy are just a couple of key-features away from having a god-tier cruiser protection scheme. Let's go through the checklist: Anti-torpedo damage reduction in excess of 25% Citadel capable of repelling even large-caliber AP shells 27mm extremities or greater Upper hull in excess of 30mm Amidships deck in excess of 30mm Ice-breaker bow & stern So barring having a Furutaka-style deck and a Stalingrad ice-breaker, Siegfried and Agir have about the best defenses for cruisers that are available. But let's go into the details: Anti-Torpedo Protection Look, most cruisers don't have any torpedo damage reduction to speak of, never mind the "better-than-many-battleship" levels boasted by Siegfried and Agir. At present, they have the BEST fish-protection found on any cruiser in the game. Let's not forget that these two ships also have a German Hydroacoustic Search which further reduces the dangers presented by torpedoes. Short of these ships being more nimble (which they are decidedly not), you have the best defense you could ask when it comes to mitigating torpedo damage. Cruiser Turtlebacks & Internal Citadels Taken from GameModels3D.com with colours exaggerated to show the different layers of citadel protection on the O-class battlecruisers. This way you can clearly see the external 190mm belt in red (sloped at -1º to -21º), the 80mm turtleback in yellow (sloped 49º to 60º) and the citadel itself shown in blue (0º). Most AP shells have to contend with passing at least one auto-ricochet check to punch through her turtleback. The protection scheme of the O-class battlecruisers citadel protection closely resembles that of a German battleship. Their armour is optimized to protect the magazines and machine spaces in medium to close range encounters. However, it remains vulnerable to high-penetration, long-range fire. While these ships are not immune to citadel hits, they are about as well protected as you could hope for a cruiser to be. The effectiveness of their citadel protection varies depending upon where the ship is struck and the angle of incoming fire. Their lateral belt + turtleback protection covers the whole range from "impossible to citadel" to "difficult but not impossible" depending. Barring a shell moving at a perfect horizontal or slightly upward motion (possible due to normalization after penetrating the reverse-sloped belt), the O-class's turtleback isn't inclined enough to guarantee ricochets. Thus there's always a chance of a shell with sufficient penetration to punch into their magazines or machine spaces. The two layers of armour work in tandem with the near vertical sections of belt armour around the funnels being mated with the most steeply sloped turtleback and the more shallow angled turtleback around the magazines is paired with the most exaggerated reverse slope of the belt. The biggest danger to these ships when caught broadside are the (relatively) low velocity but high penetration shells of American battleships or the massive shells off Yamato, Musashi and Shikishima. At range, every battleship becomes more dangerous. Every time you get shot, you're rolling the dice and hoping that RNGeebus will be kind. So don't go offering up your broadside unless you're one pious momo. Their biggest citadel weakness is their enormous 27mm thick snouts which can be overmatched. Unlike other high-tier German cruisers, they have no 'ice-breaker', no extended waterline belt to help foil shots aimed at their squishy bits. For opponents that aware of this vulnerability, this area can be hit for days for easy big-damage. I'm not going to lie -- it can be frustrating to try and protect this weakness. If your opponents aren't playing ball, you're going to have a bad time. Make no mistake: Agir and Siegfried are not battleships -- they can't stand up to battleship levels of punishment. The O-class's 90mm upper hull is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it helps you resist HE shells and ricochet AP rounds when you're angled. On the flip side, it guarantees fusing every single AP shell it faces if the shell manages to penetrate, leading to Siegfried and Agir taking big damage. The recess into which Siegfried's hull-mounted torpedoes are set opens up a further shell-trap that can be exploited by your opponents. Be careful. Suck it, 381mm Guns You too, 127mm guns. Let's step away from dwelling on citadel hits and simply talk about resisting damage entirely. Given the glut of 381mm and smaller caliber guns throwing AP shells about at high-tiers these days, these ships can face-tank select targets with relative impunity. Furthermore, the 27mm threshold makes them immune to direct damage from 127mm HE shells even if they're using the Inertial Fuse for HE Shells skill, so that's pretty nice too. Their 90mm upper hull is again capable of being pretty troll when it comes to resisting damage -- both AP and HE shells, though you need to angle to resist the former. This opens the door for some interesting (if limited) brawling opportunities. The flip side is that this thicker armour all but guarantees everything (and I do mean everything) will have their AP shells fuse properly and deal chunktacular penetration damage. This can be as devastating as individual citadel hits. Overall, though, these ships are better at resisting citadel hits than they are direct damage. HE spam from cruisers is stupid-dangerous. Siegfriend and Agir's 30mm decks and 27mm extremities are big weak spots for HE to exploit. Lemme repeat myself: these are not German battleships -- they're not built to shrug off damage to the same level as those Deutsches-Stahl leviathans. You can lose HP in a hurry even if you never take a single citadel hit. So beware. Barring exceptions, most cruisers can queue up to 33% of citadel damage for repairs. Agir & Siegfried's large hit point pool gives them access to better heals, but this still falls behind the extra Repair Party charge enjoyed by Azuma and the portable` dry-docks of the British cruisers. Overall Feels The O-class sisters remind me a lot of tier VI and VII battleships -- tough but not invulnerable, with stupidly-big weak spots that are easy to exploit. Fire is a problem. Overmatch is a problem. HE spam is a problem. AP penetrating hits are a problem, but proper angling can help mitigate it. Citadel hits happen but they're uncommon and largely caused by your own mistakes, so that's easier to stomach. If you think of playing one of the O-class as the equivalent of bringing a tier VII battleship up into a tier IX match, you're not far off in terms of considering their durability. Their protection level is much better than that of the typical cruiser, but they fall well short of god-tier. VERDICT: Hella good, very rewarding and lots of fun. Agility Top Speed: 33.5 knots Turning Radius: 880m Rudder Shift Time: 14.0 seconds 4/4 Engine Speed Rate of Turn: 4.7º/s These aren't cruisers. Well, they are -- they conform to cruiser norms in terms of energy retention, for example. The rest of their agility parameters are very much those of a battleship. These aren't ships with which you can wiggle and dodge. Their bad fire angles on their guns, especially when kiting, makes this dangerous to attempt -- doubly so with their 27mm extremities being the literal back door into their citadel. They barely have more speed than most of the battleships they face, to say nothing of the cruisers, so kiting is made even harder. You have to pay close attention to the flow of battle and plan your moves accordingly. This largely limits their manoeuvres of defense to flashing their sides just enough to bait hits into their belt rather than their honkers and playing keep-away from the second line until it's time to brawl. It could be worse, I suppose. They could crawl like Roon does. Apparently Dmitri Donskoi's in-port stats are being fixed soon! VERDICT: One of the weaknesses of these ships. Refrigerator Base/Minimum Surface Detection: 15.12km / 11.88km Base/Minimum Air Detection Range: 10.74km/8.7km Detection Range When Firing in Smoke: 11.9km Hydroacoustic Search Ranges: 4km torpedo detection, 6km ship detection. If these were battleships, their Vision Control would be excellent, but they're not. They're cruisers, so their Vision Control kinda sucks. While they do bring the German cruiser Hydroacoustic Search to the table, they're not pairing it with great surface detection or good sprinting speed. This largely limits aggressive use of the consumable to misplays on your opponent's part. Otherwise, it's just there to keep you and your allies torpedo-safe. Like Azuma before them, these ships also lack the Surveillance Radar boasted by American & Soviet large cruisers. That consumable is nearly a must-have in team settings, so going without a huge strike against these ships. Overall, Siegfried feels this deficiency in concealment much less than Agir. Siegfried's guns are more comfortable at a distance and she has longer range to boot. Heck, Siegfried can almost stealth-fire her secondaries (one of these days, WG will screw up and I will have my stealth-firing secondary cruiser). This, in my opinion, makes her the easier and more powerful ship between the two when combined with everything else. VERDICT: This is another area where they perform poorly, but it's not unexpected. Alright, that's all of their similarities. Let's go over what makes them unique. Options Let's start with the pretty mild differences of their option optimization. Consumables Agir and Siegfried differ in their consumable load-outs with Siegfried having more options than Agir. I've highlighted the consumables that are Siegfried-only. Agir and Siegfried share the following consumables: Their Damage Control Party is standard for a cruiser with a 60s reset timer and 5s active period. It comes with unlimited charges. They have access to a German Cruiser's Hydroacoustic Search with a 4km torpedo detection range and a 6km ship detection range. Both start with 3 charges and have a 120s reset timer. Finally, they both share a Repair Party. This heals back 14% of the ship's health over 28s. 50% of penetration damage is queued up along with 33% of citadel damage and 100% of all other damage types. This starts with 3 charges and has an 80s reset timer. For Siegfried, I prefer a Hydroacoustic Search along with a Spotting Aircraft for my consumables of choice. SIEGFRIED ONLY CONSUMABLES Siegfried may swap its Hydroacoustic Search for Defensive AA Fire which comes with three charges and an 80s reset timer. Siegfried bumps her Repair Party over to the fourth slot and has the option of both catapult aircraft in her third slot. Her Spotting Aircraft provides the usual 20% bonus to range for 100s. It comes with 4 charges and a 240s reset timer. Alternatively, she can use a Catapult Fighter. The squadron is active for 60s with a 90s reset timer and comes with three charges. Upgrades There's a smart way to build for these ships but there's also the fun way. Being some of the first cruisers with capable secondaries, it's fun to build for them for a lark. In Siegfried's case, this may even be slightly competitive. Start with Main Armaments Modification 1. You have a choice in slot two. Fire damage is pretty dangerous for these ships so Damage Control System Modification 1 is a sound investment. Alternatively, you can go into the Armory and spend 17,000 for Hydroacoustic Search Modification 1. In slot three, Aiming System Modification 1 is optimal for both ships. Alternatively, you can grab Secondary Gun Modification 1 for the memes. This will pay off more for Siegfried but it can work for Agir too, especially in PVE modes. Again, with full-damage fires being a threat, Damage Control System Modification 2 is optimal for slot four but you can swap it out for Steering Gears Modification 1 if you prefer to take a more active hand in your defense. Concealment Expert is too good not to be the optimal choice in slot five. For those who like to live fast and dangerous, Steering Gears Modification 2 is an option, but keep in mind that these ships have bad fire angles for kiting so this isn't ideal. Finally, let there be no doubt that Main Battery Modification 3 is the best choice for slot six. Captain Skills There's a smart way to build for these ships and then there's the German secondary battleship build. The smart way borrows the entirety of the "fire resistant battleship" build. I agree, girls. So dull even if it is the "ideal build". You can swap out Priority Target for another tier 1 skill of your choice. Expert Loader is a good idea, but the usual standbys of Preventative Maintenance and Incoming Fire Alert are reasonable. German battleship build, recently recommended with my Odin review! Make sure you take Secondary Gun Modification 1 for this build and load up on Mike Yankee Soxisix signals. All of the cool kids are doing it. Camouflage Both ships have their default Type 10 Camouflage and you can purchase the Nordic Camouflage separately as a cosmetic swap. Both provide identical bonuses, so don't stress about missing out on possible economic gains by not spending more money. These are standard bonuses for tier IX premiums: -3% surface detection +4% increased dispersion of enemy shells. -20% to post-battle service costs. +100% to experience gains. So nothing too extreme there. Let's move onto their anti-aircraft firepower. Verdict: Siegfried has better options than Agir by a country mile, offering two distinct and viable play styles not only in PVE but PVP as well. Siegfried's default camo scheme, which is pretty sexy. Agir's default camo scheme is more grim. The Nordic camouflage looks good on Siegfried. But it looks better on Agir, in my opinion. Anti-Aircraft Defense Flak Bursts: 5 explosions (6 for Agir) for 1,540 damage per blast at 3.5km to 6km. Siegfried / Agir Long Ranged (up to 6.0km): 102 / 130 dps at 90% accuracy Siegfried / Agir Medium Ranged (up to 4.0km): 329 / 364 dps at 90% accuracy Siegfried / Agir Short Ranged (up to 2.0km): 147 / 119 dps at 85% accuracy Agir has better raw AA numbers than Siegfried. Siegfried has access to Defensive AA Fire (if she chooses to ditch Hydroacoustic Search). Both ships have "good" AA firepower, but this doesn't particularly matter. Individually, these ships have enough teeth on them to make dropping on them expensive in the long run. However, it would be a fool's mistake to think they're capable of fending off a determined CV by themselves. Apply the standard anti-CV tactics in order to keep safe. Blob-up and Just Dodge™. Otherwise, you're food. Long story short: Agir's AA is noticeably better (flirting with Alaska-levels) but Siegfried can take DFAA. I've ranked these in order of "effective AA DPS" -- meaning simply that I applied a formula (DPS *[range-1km]). This weights longer ranged AA mounts more than shorter ranged ones but it doesn't do so perfectly. This order only really gives an impression of ranking of personal AA defense, not overall effective values (such as providing support to an ally). At the end of the day, everything between Brindisi and Saint Louis are very, very close and this ranking doesn't really speak to in-game effectiveness. That's because none of this really matters. Sadly, CVs can still dunk on you no matter what and the idea that REALLY GOOD AA firepower could somehow prevent drops is a thing of the distant past. VERDICT: Disappointingly good. I say disappointing because good AA doesn't really mean anything unless the enemy CV is a total novice. Firepower Main Battery: Nine 305mm guns in 3x3 turrets (Agir) or six 380mm guns in 3x2 turrets (Siegfried). Both are setup in an A-B-X superfiring configuration. Secondary Battery: Eighteen 128mm guns in 9x2 turrets (Agir) and fourteen 128mm guns in 7x2 turrets (Siegfried). Torpedoes: Eight tubes in 2x4 launchers mounted on either side amidships. Let's start with the similarities between the two ships. Torpeedus Agir and Siegfried both have access to the same Steinbutt torpedoes (heh, butts). If you imagine Tirpitz's torpedoes but add an extra knot of speed, you're bang on the money. So they're stupid short ranged and kinda wimpy on a per-torpedo basis all things told. You're only ever going to get to use them in brawls or ambushes so keep that in mind. I can forgive their performance as both Agir and Siegfried feel like battleships, even if they are ostensibly cruisers. Their fish are super fun to use but you won't get to use them in every game. Still, those moments are always memorable and totally worth it. The big difference between the two ships in terms of their torpedoes are how they're mounted. Agir has them on deck giving her good forward firing arcs. Siegfried houses hers in the hull lower down, greatly reducing their field of fire (and opening up a potential shell trap besides). Agir has good torpedo arcs and terrible gun firing arcs. Siegfried has terrible torpedo arcs and less terrible (but still awful) gun firing arcs than Agir. Secondaries Siegfried has the better secondaries. This is despite Agir having more of them. Normally I wouldn't bother wasting more than a couple of sentences on cruiser secondaries, but these ships are special ... and not in that "Kiev also has a secondary!" kinda special. Siegfried's secondaries are so good, she's arguably the first cruiser in World of Warships where a full secondary build is competitive. While Siegfried doesn't have the broadside weight of a battleship, her secondaries are good enough with the combination of high penetration, good range and a decent rate of fire. Mouse's impression of the effectiveness of most cruiser secondaries. Agir should be in a similar state but she's not. Despite having the same penetration and an even better volume of fire grace of having an extra turret firing broadside, her arcs are slightly worse and she loses out on range. While you can still make this work in Co-Op battles, it's really not viable in a PVP environment -- not for the returns you get. Personally, I totally blame Flamu for this as he spilled the beans on how fun this is. Now your only way to get access to this game play is by grinding out the Research Bureau. BOOOO, Flamu! BOOOOO! You ruined everything! ♥ I stress it's this deficit of range that really hurts Agir and range remains the key factor that determines secondary-build viability in Random Battles. Agir's 5.3km base range can only be upgraded as far as 8.01km with a deep secondary build -- compare that to Siegfried's 11.49km and there's just too much of a gap. Perhaps more importantly, Siegfried's main battery gun performance isn't as hurt by spending her third upgrade slot to increase range as it is with Agir, owing to Siegfried's improved main battery gun dispersion (more on that later). You can make a secondary build on Agir work, but it's a pale shadow of the potential found on Siegfried. On the whole, it's exciting to see secondaries on cruisers being viable both to a lesser and greater degree on Agir and Siegfried respectively. I would have preferred to see this on a 203mm or 152mm armed cruiser rather than a near-perfect battleship analogue, but hey, it's progress. No, it doesn't make sense. Whatever logic was used to determine these fire angles, it's not consistent between the two vessels. Siegfried simply has better arcs on her secondaries. I have no idea why. Main Battery Guns These two ships couldn't be any more different when it comes to their main battery guns. Since I recently finished reviewing Odin, let's start with Agir's armament first because there's a lot of parallels there. Odin, Perfected If you read my review of Odin, the tier VIII German battleship, I wasn't very flattering when it came to my evaluation of her guns. Odin's 305mm guns struggle to put enough shells on target. Her battleship dispersion and her slower rate of fire just means that not enough shells stack to keep up with the damage she needs to put out. This might not be such a big issue if Odin struck like a hammer from on high, but she doesn't. While her 305mm guns are pretty good cruiser killers once you compare them to the other super cruisers, they're really lacking. Alaska & Stalingrad have improved auto-ricochet mechanics. Kronshtadt and Stalingrad have god-tier levels of AP penetration. Azuma and Yoshino have improved HE damage. So without any of these specialities, Odin was left struggling to deal damage when someone angles or plays a battleship that won't brawl with them. For comparison, here is Odin's main battery dispersion (in yellow on the left) using a standard dispersion test. This is 180 AP shells fired at 15km, locked onto a stationary Fuso bot. The Fuso lacks camouflage and Odin is using Aiming Systems Modification 1 to reduced her dispersion by 7%. Shots are coming in from right to left (Fuso is bow-tanking). Odin's 'good for a battleship' dispersion is alright, but it doesn't do the ship any favours given the rather wimpy punch of her shells. Agir's main battery gun dispersion (in pink on the right) following the same parameters as Odin's above. While Odin makes use of the American-British-German battleship dispersion area, Agir makes use of the Graf Spee (aka "Battlecruiser") dispersion. Agir inherits Odin's lackluster AP penetration and anemic HE issues. Boooo. However, her improved dispersion and faster rate of fire compensates somewhat for this disparity in performance. Her shells are "bad" but she fires enough of them and hits often enough to kinda-sorta offset her disastrous ammunition. Still, this isn't a ship in which you want to be actively trading fire with opponents. She's not a high DPM monster nor are her alpha strikes particularly impressive barring a cruiser derping monstrously. Fire opportunistically and avoid return damage as best you can. I struggle to call Agir's main battery firepower "good". It's alright -- I'd give it no more than that. There's nothing here really to get excited over. Siegfried, on the other hand... Gneisenau, Perfected Imagine if Gneisenau (or Tirpitz for that matter), hit with nearly every shell she fired. German 380mm guns are notorious for their inaccuracy so that might be a little difficult, but make the effort. Difficulties visualizing aside, take a cruiser and equip it with a small battery of battleship caliber weapons and make them stupid-accurate. That's Siegfried. That's her thing. It goes beyond that though. Siegfried takes Gneisenau's offensive abilities and improves upon them to such a degree that it's hard to believe Siegfried made it out of testing without significant nerfs. She boasts a slightly more powerful torpedo armament than Gneisenau. Her secondaries are longer ranged, using the same excellent 128mm L/61s with their improved penetration. And finally, Siegfried's main battery guns hit whatever you aim at -- something the tier VII and VIII German battleships could only dream of. It's this last part, it's her main battery guns, which puts her head and shoulders above Gneisenau despite the similarities of their armaments. Let's take a blast from the past to illustrate why Siegfried's accuracy is so jaw dropping. This is Bismarck's old dispersion (in yellow on the left), back when she was still using the French & Italian battleship patterns. Gneisenau and Tirpitz shared in this performance, with all three ships having 1.8 sigma. Things have improved slightly -- at 15km the width of their fall has reduced by 3 meters from 198m shown here (with ASM1 installed) to 195m with the new American battleship dispersion they're presently using. Yeah, you kinda got bamboozled if you thought the recent changes fixed anything. Siegfried (in blue on the right) uses cruiser dispersion. No, not battlecruiser -- actual cruiser dispersion. She has the same spread of shots as you'd find on Cleveland or Henri IV. She has their 2.05 sigma too unlike the 1.8 sigma you played with when using German battleships. Aim well and you can hit with everything. It's for this reason that Siegfried can get away with upgrading her secondaries rather than focusing on reducing her main battery dispersion -- it's baseline value is already good enough and ASM1 isn't changing much. Aim well and you can hit with EVERYTHING. Look, German 380mm L/52s aren't the most impressive of battleship weapons but they're certainly novel on a cruiser. Even with that said, landing six out of six battleship caliber shells of a given volley is enough to make anyone sit up and take notice regardless of the ship type. Like Jean Bart, Siegfried will tear you a new one if you're foolish enough to give her a broadside. While the French battleship will do it through volume of fire, Siegfried will do it with a single well placed shot. Even her awful HE performance is counteracted (somewhat) by this phenomenal accuracy she boasts. Siegfried almost feels Soviet, what with firing high-velocity shells and having the ability to snipe destroyers from a distance. It's that accuracy that solves a lot of Siegfried's woes -- not all of them, mind you, but a lot. Without landing citadel hits or steady penetrations, Siegfried will lose just about any damage race. So while her individual hits are pretty jaw dropping, it's a struggle to land enough of them to make a difference if you're not prioritizing targets properly. As good as Siegfried's guns are on paper, without a good head behind the helm, she can be pretty terrible. Unlike Agir's guns, which improve upon pretty forgettable weapons, Siegfried's are an improvement on some rather novel guns. If nothing else, Siegfried makes for some interesting gunnery. Imperfect Perfections As different as the guns are on the two ships, Siegfried and Agir share a couple of problems. Poor damage out put. Poor gun firing angles. As good as Siegfried and Agir's guns can be, they're fouled by angling. Granted, Agir is more vulnerable to this than Siegfried, but Siegfried performs even more poorly when it finally meets a target it can't overmatch. German HE performance is notoriously terrible and if these ships are forced to fire it for long, their numbers will tank. Agir's only saving grace in this regard is her fire setting ability which is ... well, it's not great but it's not at the appalling levels Siegfried suffers. In short, these ships struggle in head-up fights where they can't brawl and they can't use their AP shells reliably. If an enemy is aware of them and reacts accordingly, they can largely shut down their damage output outside of close-range knife fights. Agir's AP DPM is pretty darned respectable -- more-so if you consider she can make ready use of it more often than many other cruisers. Siegfried, by contrast, is way behind. But when you remember she has battleship caliber guns, capable of actually landing citadel hits reliably at a distance, this helps make up for it. However, she's always going to lag on damage output, so she needs to aim well and survive long to keep up. I made this graph the same scale as the AP DPM so you could compare them. The O-class cruisers really miss out on HE DPM -- Siegfried's is especially appalling. Landing six penetrating HE shells is only 8,712 damage -- and that's a best case scenario every 22.9 to 26s. While this will ruin any destroyer's day, other targets can shrug that off, especially when it halves due to saturation. While Agir's HE shell performance may be lacking, her fire setting is on par with Azuma and Alaska, which is respectable. Siegfried is again pretty embarrassing. As for firing angles, well... they're terrible, frankly. You have to expose a whole lot of broadside to fire forward and even more to fire rearward. Agir is especially bad for this which opens up these ships to taking a lot of damage they should otherwise be able to avoid. Furthermore, this makes both ships very poor choices for kiting. When engaging targets chasing them, their guns are doubly terrible. First, their overmatch potential is limited -- Agir moreso than Siegfried, but the latter has her problems too. Next, you're faced with the loser choice of either firing with a single turret or slowing yourself down when you open up your broadside to return fire with their A & B turrets. Agir is much worse for this than Siegfried -- as if Siegfried needed any more improvements over her sister. The only place where Agir's gun handling performs better is her faster turret traverse. Once you stack on Main Battery Modification 3, Siegfried's gun traverse gets so sluggish she can actively out-turn her turrets. I hate that. You'll want Expert Marksman if you can afford it, but Siegfried's deep secondary build might preclude you from having the points to pick it up. Finally, the biggest drawback of these ships is the need for time deal their damage. While you can hope for some cruiser to offer themselves up as an easy meal, their low damage output means that you're leaning on their survivability to last longer -- giving you more opportunities to make their weapons count. This can be from stacking fires in Agir, padding numbers with Siegfried's secondaries or finally getting a chance where you get to use their fish. Siegfried's numbers are especially volatile with her 380mm guns providing periods of both feast and famine. More time gives you more chances to finally find those opportunities. Agir Summary Agir corrects some of the problems found with Odin's armament but then takes on additional problems of poor fire angles and ineffective backup weaponry. Firepower wise, I'd rather have Alaska or Azuma. These ships all have similar AP penetration but Alaska has her improved autobounce angles and Azuma has way better HE shells. All three are comparable firebugs. Still, the torpedoes that Agir has are nice but I can't see myself enjoying her secondaries outside of co-op. So yeah, poor marks here. Siegfried Summary By contrast, Siegfried's main battery guns are exciting and so are her secondaries. Yeah, she has problems but they're not insurmountable and it's a worthwhile price to pay to have access to 380mm guns that hit with (almost) everything. Verdict: Siegfried's weapons are fun and unique. Agir is Odin Two: The Electric Boogaloo with better main battery guns but worse secondaries which is boring as all get out. Final Evaluation I have nothing but praise for Siegfried and I'm generally dismissive of Agir. The basis of these feels is pretty simple: Siegfried's game play is new and novel -- she's effectively a glass-cannon version of Gneisenau, greatly improving offense at the expense of durability. Agir, by contrast, is a more-different Odin but she loses out entirely on secondaries and adds durability issues. The other way of looking at Agir is to compare her to the front-running large cruiser at tier IX, Alaska. Comparing the two of them, Alaska is hands down better -- she has better artillery and better team utility. Agir only wins out in brawls. I wouldn't go so far to say that Siegfried is better than Alaska, but at least Siegfried offers a change in game play. Fun and novelty is a worth the price of optimization in my opinion. I'm not surprised Siegfried is the more compelling choice over Agir, not when she's locked behind the Research Bureau grind. Unlike Agir which seemed to be nerfed every step along the way of her development, Siegfried had only two significant changes made to her since her introduction in early 2019. First, her AA power got played around with. That shouldn't be unexpected given the volatility of the CV rework over that same time period but it is what it is. Second, her torpedoes dropped from an 8km range to a 6km range. Wargaming have, quite deliberately, preserved the attractive secondary-heavy game play that turned people's heads during Agir's development. Siegfried is a big ol' fat carrot on a stick hoping to lure you into regrinding a few tech tree lines. To me, Agir feels like a consolation prize -- a poor man's Siegfried, as it were. Though she is a lot more accessible and she's not terrible, she's a distant second to her sister ship and even further behind Alaska. Given the ongoing events, if people wanted Agir, I'd steer them to Odin instead. I can't speak for Siegfried being "worth it" for having to participate in the Research Bureau, but she is a good ship -- as I have said repeatedly, she's interesting if nothing else. It's up to you if that's worth your time investment. So yeah, that's the O-class. A fun ship locked behind a painful experience and a meh ship that will forever have you looking over your shoulder wondering what you could have had instead. Siegfried turned quite a few heads during play testing. Agir just turned stomachs with her constant nerfs. Conclusion Wargaming is still at it. Champagne has been finalized so there's another ship added onto the pile that needs reviewing. I need some time off after this one, so I don't anticipate having another review out before early July. Thank you very much for reading.
  6. 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/
  7. Dunkerque overtaking Strasbourg. The following is a review of Dunkerque & Strasbourg, the tier VI & VII French battleships. They were both provided to me by Wargaming for review purposes at no cost to me. To the best of my knowledge, the statistics discussed in this review are current as of patch 0.9.12. Please be aware that their performance may change in the future. I couldn't help myself. I saw an opportunity to not only review a new ship but to update an older one too. Maybe I'll make this a regular thing going into the future whenever Wargaming releases a comparable sister-ship -- review the new addition and touch base on an older one. It seems a bit ambitious to declare it as the new norm, but we'll see what happens. At any rate, this is a review of both Dunkerque-class battleships: Dunkerque at tier VI and her new sister-ship, Strasbourg at tier VII. The two ships are almost identical which raises concerns on balance. Strasbourg is Dunkerque in almost every metric that matters short of tiering and access to the Main Battery Reload Consumable. One can't help but ask the following questions: Is Dunkerque so good at tier VI that she can be effectively cloned and placed at tier VII with little issue? Just how influential are the small changes made between the two ships? Is Main Battery Reload Booster that powerful on a 330m armed platform? Is Strasbourg worth the grind or should you just stick with Dunkerque? Let's find some answers! Quick Summary: Fast, lightly armoured battlecruisers with all eight of it's quick-firing 330mm guns mounted in two quad-turrets on their bows. Strasbourg has access to the Main Battery Reload Booster consumable. PROS All forward gun arrangement simplifies maximizing firepower. Fast reload (26s Dunkerque, 25s Strasbourg) Good HE shell performance and fire setting. Comfortable gun handling. Long ranged with good ballistics over distance. Solid agility with a good top speed and rate of turn. Strasbourg Specific: Has access to the Main Battery Reload Booster consumable. CONS Unable to fire her main battery guns directly rearward (for some inexplicable reason!) Lightly armoured, highly vulnerable to AP overmatch and HE shells. Exposed, high-water citadel with thin belt armour. Terrible anti-aircraft firepower. Large surface detection range. Strasbourg Specific: Small hit point pool for a tier VII battleship. Summary of Differences If you're a crusty ol' veteran with playing Dunkerque, so experienced in Marine Nationale ways battlecruiser ways that you serenade baguettes, you don't need me to tell you what she's like. To expedite things for these players, here's a list of all of the differences between the two battleships, from the significant to the inane. These are listed Dunkerque vs Strasbourg: Tier: VI vs VII (duh) Economy: VI vs VII (higher tiered ships earn more credits and experience for the same actions) Fire Resistance Coefficient: 23.31% vs 29.97% Superstructure HP: 1,800 vs 1,700 Belt Armour: 225mm vs 283mm Rear Upper Athwartship: 198mm vs 210mm Turtleback: 40mm vs 50mm Turret Faces: 330mm vs 360mm Turret Backs: 335mm vs 352mm Turret Floor: 150mm vs 160mm Sigma: 1.7 vs 1.8 Main Battery Reload: 26s vs 25s Main Battery Range: 18.21km vs 19.1km A-Turret's Fire Arcs: 310º vs 294º Number of 37mm twin AA mounts: 5 (18dps) vs 4 (16dps) Flak Explosion Damage: 1,330 vs 1,400 Main Battery Reload Booster: no vs yes Tonnage: 35,500 vs 36,308 Permanent Camos: 4 vs 2 Overview Skill Floor: Simple / CASUAL / Challenging / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / HIGH / Difficult Both ships are wonderfully uncomplicated to use. The all-forward gun arrangement helps keep new-players safe, mitigating the need to expose the ship's broadside in order to maximize firepower. Their long range also helps keep new players safe. The ship's speed is also a blessing -- fast enough to get the ship where it needs to go but not being so fast that she can easily out-strip support as new players are wont to do. Were the ship easier to hide or if it had a better protection scheme, it might have warranted a "Simple" rating. There's a lot of strong carry potential with these ships. The combination of good speed and a relatively fast reload allows these ships to wreak all kinds of mayhem. Strasbourg's Main Battery Reload Booster is particularly delicious for punishing exposed enemies, be they a briefly lit lolibote or a high-tier battleship that needs to be burned. Unfortunately, they are painfully soft-skinned and very difficult to hide which are both strong limiting factors. The lack of overmatch potential on their 330mm guns is also a bit frustrating, though proper ammunition use can help mitigate this drawback. Options Both ships share similar customization principles. The marked difference between the two is in their consumables (naturally), but otherwise they can be built the same. Consumables Both ships have the same, standard Damage Control Party for French battleships. This has a 15 second active period, an 80 second reset timer and unlimited charges. Similarly, they share the same Repair Party which heals back up to 14% of the ship's starting hit points per charge. It queues 50% of all penetration damage, 10% of citadel damage and 100% of everything else. It has an 80 second reset timer. Their last shared consumables are the option between a Catapult Fighter and Spotter Aircraft. Dunkerque mounts these in her third slot and Strasbourg her fourth. The latter consumable increases their range by 20% for 100 seconds with a 240 second reset timer. Both ships begin with 4 charges. The former consumable starts with only three charges, deploying a pair of fighters which orbit the ship for 60 seconds. It has a 90 second reset timer. What sets Strasbourg apart is her access to Main Battery Reload Booster in her third slot. This reduces the reload time of her main battery guns by half for 20 seconds. She comes with four charges to start and it has an 180 second reset timer. Upgrades Both ships use the same build. In your first slot, Main Armaments Modification 1 is arguably optimal given the relative fragility of the Dunkerque-class's main weapons. Nothing sucks more than losing one of only two turrets! Otherwise, the two special upgrades, Spotter Aircraft Modification 1 and Damage Control Party Modification 1 may be used instead. They can be purchased for 17,000 from the Armory . Damage Control System Modification 1 is the only upgrade worth considering in slot 2. In slot three, Aiming System Modification 1 is optimal. But if you want, you can trade that out for faster turret traverse with Main Battery Modification 2 but this has much less benefit than decreasing the dispersion area. There are interesting choices for these ships in the fourth slot. Damage Control System Modification 2 is the most straight-forward and optimal, reducing fire and flooding damage. You can naturally opt to improve their handling by taking Steering Gears Modification 1 -- their high rate of turn and long range does lend them well to active dodging. However, given the disposition of these ships and their love of hugging islands, there's some worth in taking Propulsion Modification 1 for better acceleration from a dead stop. It's up to you based on your preferred style of play. When in doubt, though, default to Damage Control System Modification 2. Commander Skills Both ships can easily make use of the same commander. The ideal build differs somewhat from the default boring ol' battleship build in that Dunkerque and Strasbourg both benefit considerably from the Expert Loader skill. Making room for it can leave you with a skill point leftover which isn't as optimal as other builds. Oh well. Start with choosing between Priority Target and Incoming Fire Alert. I much prefer the former, but it's up to you. Grab the skills circled in green next to complete your 10pt build: Adrenaline Rush, Basics of Survivability and Fire Prevention. Next double-back and grab the skills in the red squares: Concealment Expert, Superintendent and Expert Loader. The skills in blue squares are nice to have but you may struggle to fit them in with the above recommendations. Mix and match to your tastes. Camouflage There are multiple camouflage options between the two ships. Dunkerque has Type 10, Fleur d'Acier (Steel Flower), Azur Lane and Mid-Autumn Festival camouflage patterns. Strasbourg has Type 10 and Winter Holiday camouflage patterns. All of the differences are cosmetic, providing the identical bonuses of: -3% surface detection +4% increased dispersion of enemy shells. -10% to post-battle service costs. +50% to experience gains. As an older (and popular) ship, Dunkerque has had a large number of premium camouflage types -- which is hella fun. I really like her Azur Lane camo. It's nice and sharp with the red and white contrast. Strasbourg's camo options are much more subdued. I'm not a fan of her Holiday camo. Firepower Main Battery: Eight 330mm/52 guns in 2x4 turrets mounted on the bow in a A-B superfiring configuration. Secondary Battery: Twenty 130mm guns in 5x4 turrets with two turrets per side and one mounted on the centre line facing the stern. Lemme preface this by saying that I'm not going to talk about the secondaries off the Dunkerque-class. They're not worth specializing into at the moment with their limited fire arcs, to say nothing of how poorly these ships fare in a brawl. Onto the main event! Big Guns, Bad Habits & Bae Bote I admit I have a bit of a bias against smaller-caliber battleship guns at the mid-tiers. This stems from my early days in World of Warships, having fallen in love with the overmatch potential of Warspite's 381mm guns tier VI. Bae bote's artillery, while not idiot proof, certainly lent itself well to firing nothing but a homogeneous loadout of AP shells. With all of the heavy lifting those Royal Navy 15" guns could do, I still remember being disdainful of Dunkerque's paltry 330mm guns when I first reviewed her back in late summer of 2016. They had no overmatch potential so they were OBVIOUSLY garbage, right? I'm somewhat less naive than I was way back when. Only somewhat, mind you. I still have a bit of a blind spot with bae-bote and battleship caliber guns with large-swathes of overmatch potential. That's something these guns lack but that doesn't make them bad by any means. There's a lot of good things about the combat performance of these weapons. They have excellent ballistics over range. They have a fast reload. They're decent fire starters. They have good AP penetration. AP penetration values drawn from Wargaming's Armada 2 video on Dunkerque from August 2016. Dunkerque and Strasbourg have some very respectable AP penetration values for guns of their caliber. There are two drawbacks with these weapons to keep in mind: They have French (and Italian) gunnery dispersion. They lack overmatch potential with their AP rounds. There's not much to be said about the first flaw. French battleship dispersion is the worst in the game currently, being slightly worse than that of American, British and German battleships. This leads to wonky shell groupings from these guns, especially at the long ranges Strasbourg is so often forced to engage. Having both guns on the bow in quad mounts does make them feel a little more accurate, at least in terms of the initial outbound shell clusters. However, this is more of an illusion than a practical advantage. Still, they have average sigma values, so within their dispersion elipse (larger as it is) their shell fall is pretty standard, though the difference between the two ships in this regard is largely indistinguishable. The best players in the game struggle to discern the difference between 0.2 sigma in standard game play, to say nothing of the 0.1 sigma difference between Strasbourg (1.8 sigma) and Dunkerque (1.7 sigma). Overall, the guns feel reasonable with their accuracy though they will troll you. Thankfully, their rate of fire helps alieviate the feeling of being cheated. One of the best fixes for bad dispersion is to reload often. When individual salvos don't feel like they matter as much, it's easier to forgive a few stray shells. Dunkerque's 26 second reload feels very comfortable -- more than making up for low individual shell damage. The extra second shaved off Strasbourg's guns is nicer still, though like her dispersion you might not feel the difference. Short reload times on battleships is a hella powerful advantage, even with the slightly lower alpha-strike from their hits. Battleship gunnery is incredibly opportunist, with citadel hit "money shots" making or breaking their play experience. Dunkerque's guns are more likely to be reloaded (or almost reloaded) when an opportunity presents itself. Strasbourg's are all but guaranteed. Like Jean Bart before her, Strasbourg's access to the Main Battery Reload Booster consumable is a game-changer. She will have her guns reloaded when it matters most, ensuring she can put shells downrange at vulnerable targets and best capitalize on the opportunities presented -- whether this be blowing out the citadel of a Christmas-Makarov or stacking fires back onto a Hizen that just blew its Damage Control Party. If Strasbourg's guns had better overmatch potential, they'd be downright oveprowered. The lack of overmatch potential is a problem shared by all battleship rounds between 283mm and 356mm in caliber. While the Dunkerque-class can overmatch 23mm of armour with their AP rounds, in practical terms, 19mm plate is the last effective armour value they can best at any angle. This makes most tier V, VI and VII cruisers vulnerable to being overmatched by these AP shells, but only the very-light cruisers at tiers VIII+. Like with dispersion, this is more of an issue for Strasbourg as a consequence of her higher tiering. It's only the extremities of tier V battleships that these AP rounds can overmatch and only then if the ships in question don't have dispersed armour schemes which gets a little more common at lower tiers. Against any other target, both Dunkerque and Strasbourg will want to reach for the HE rounds instead. To this end, I've found having the Expert Loader skill very handy if you can spare the single skill point for it. Outside of issues where they might ricochet from striking a plate they cannot overmatch at too steep an angle, Dunkerque and Strasbourg's AP shells perform well, with very respectable AP penetration values across all engagement ranges, with even better penetration than New Mexico's 356mm AP rounds. It's not quite high enough to contest higher-tiered battleship citadels at ranges of 15km or beyond, but it's good enough. Dunkerque may not appear to have impressive DPM, but she is more likely to be able to fire all of her guns than most other battleships -- especially while under fire herself. Her all-forward gun arrangement allows her to maximize her firepower while still maintaining a defensive nose-in aspect. Strasbourg is listed twice. The one with the asterix denotes her using her Main Battery Reload Booster for 20s. Strasbourg's faster rate of fire gives her comparable DPM placement to Dunkerque, tier-for-tier. However, her Main Battery Reload Booster takes things to a whole other level, allowing her to punish opponents when they give her an opportunistic shot. Both ships are decent fire starters. Strasbourg flirts with Royal Navy levels when she activates her consumable (again, denoted by an asterix). Gun Layout Dunkerque's A-turret fire arcs are gorgeous. Her B-turret are much less so. This makes her B-turret a good indicator for over-angling with Dunkerque when firing to the rear. So long as A-turret can engage but B-turret cannot, she's still in auto-ricochet territory -- you know, provided that the incoming AP shells don't simply overmatch her hull. The all-bow mounted gun arrangement of the Dunkerque-class is their most striking feature. In World of Warships, this has more advantages than drawbacks. Dunkerque was not the first battleship in the game with this layout. However she was the first battleship in the game to have all of her guns capable of firing directly forward. Thus she was the first battleship in the game that could "bow tank" while still maximizing her firepower. At the time of her release, it was easy to underestimate just how effective this was and how effective it remains in World of Warships. It is very easy to maximize firepower with Dunkerque and Strasbourg. Barring kiting situations, it is easier to bring all of their guns to bear than on any other battleship. This is further facilitated by their fast (for a battleship) traverse rate of 5º/s (36s for 180º). Even in situations where Dunkerque is being chased, her "over the shoulder" firing arcs are respectable with her A-turret being capable of hucking shells 25º off her stern, still maintaining a perfect auto-ricochet target with her belt. Obviously the drawback here is that she cannot engage enemies directly to her rear. What's more, this all-forward gun arrangement makes her slow to switch sides when firing backwards as her guns have to come all of the way around. Still, the all-forward gun arrangement greatly facilitates bringing all guns on targets for much of the battle. It's this ease of bringing guns on target -- all of their guns on target -- which makes these ships dangerous and it's one of their many strengths. Strasbourg doesn't have Dunkerque's delicious A-turret's fire arcs. Summary "Always ready" -- this defines the gunnery on Dunkerque and Strasbourg, and Strasbourg more than her sister. When facing off against these ships, their faster rate of fire, good fire arcs and gun handling is what makes them dangerous. As gunnery platforms, they're super comfy and fun to play. Their individual salvos may not hit as big as other ships; a consequence of both shell size and trollish dispersion, but they don't feel at a deficit in either regard. VERDICT: Their guns perform better than their smaller caliber would suggest. Beware Strasbourg's Main Battery Reload Booster -- used correctly, it can devastate vulnerable enemies. Durability Hit Points: 52,600 Bow & stern/superstructure/upper-hull/deck: 26mm / 16mm / 26mm / 26mm Dunkerque Maximum Citadel Protection: 26mm anti-torpedo bulge + 225mm belt + 40mm turtleback + 40mm/50mm citadel wall Strasbourg Maximum Citadel Protection: 26mm anti-torpedo bulge + 283mm belt + 50mm turtleback + 40mm/50mm citadel wall Torpedo Damage Reduction: 25% The durability fortunes of these two battlecruisers flips between their hit point totals and their armour profiles. While I would not call either ship blessed in either category, it's more that one or the other is "less-worse" in a given area than its sister ship. Overall, Strasbourg loses out wholesale to her sister, if only because she sits a full tier higher and contends with bigger threats. Health Pool Strasboug is the big loser here when it comes to comparing hit points. Dunkerque wins no prizes either, but as a tier VI vessel, she's she doesn't stand out in any negative or positive way. Strasbourg's woes come in two areas: She has a small (tier VI-sized) hit point pool. Her Repair Party is normal. The former kind of surprises me -- not that she has a small hit point pool, but that it's unchanged from Dunkerque's own despite the (slight) increase in tonnage. Best estimates should put Strasbourg's hit point total almost 1,000hp higher than Dunkerque. That's not enough to rescue her from the doldrums of tier VII health totals, but every scrap certainly helps and it would let her overtake Lyon at the very least. Moreover, the issue Strasbourg faces at tier VII comes from her plain-Jane Repair Party consumable. The glut of Royal Navy ships at tier VII along with Colorado makes Strasbourg's bare-bones Repair Party seem weak by comparison, especially on a ship with a hit point deficit. I suppose it's a blessing that she's not stuck with one fewer charges the way the Soviet ships and Florida are neutered, so that's something. Dunkerque's effective hit point pool is on the low side of average for a tier VI battleship. Now you can imagine what happens when you bring a "low side of average" effective health pool to a tier VII match-up. This is especially noteworthy as tier VII is where health regeneration gets super weird and powerful. Armour Profile When it comes to repelling HE shells, the two Dunkerque-sisters are functionally identical. While there exists some minor differences in their protection schemes, these are a non-issue when it comes to repelling HE shells. Dunkerque and Strasbourg are exceedingly soft-skinned and highly vulnerable to HE fire. Their near-homogeneous 26mm external plate makes them easy prey, not only for light cruisers but for 127mm+ armed destroyers. While the Inertial Fuse for HE Shells skill may be necessary, her opponents all have the potential to farm damage off the soft-skinned profiles of the Dunkerque-class battleships. Both battleships bleed a lot of hit points to small and medium caliber HE shells. Things don't get better when it comes to repelling AP rounds. Strasbourg attempts to correct some of the defence issues of her sister-ship with improved turret, belt and citadel protection profiles. Dunkerque is notoriously vulnerable to citadel hits, going so far as to have her machine spaces colour-coded through one of her camouflage patterns (thank you, Yuro, for pointing that out!). The thinness of her citadel protection means that with very few exceptions (Oklahoma, I'm looking at you), Dunkerque is vulnerable to battleship calibre AP shells at all ranges. This goes double for any AP rounds from guns of 380mm or larger as they are fully capable of overmatching her external armour plate and can land citadel hits at nearly any angle. Though Strasbourg's protection is improved, it's never so good that I would trust flashing her sides or snoot to incoming battleship rounds. Both Dunkerque-sisters take citadel hits frequently. They are both at risk of losing their turrets when they attempt to tank battleship fire. The best that could be said about Strasbourg is that she is largely immune to citadel hits from cruiser-calibre weapons, though again there are exceptions, especially at close range. Their armour profiles are almost identical but Strasbourg has the thicker belt, turtleback and turret faces. While the extra ~60mm of armour on Strasbourg's belt looks significant, the higher penetration gun she faces makes this improvement kinda moot. Summary These are ships that don't want to get hit -- like at all. Nearly every HE shell can hurt. Nearly every battleship-calibre AP round is a potential citadel hit. Having only two turrets makes the loss of one (even temporarily) a disaster. The best play with these ships is to not get hit in the first place; exercising their long range to make themselves a less appealing target. Anchoring one side against a piece of island cover is also a good practice, if only to mitigate flanking fire from enemy battleships from across the map. Limiting the angles of attack against these vessels is paramount to keeping them safe. They don't have a lot of armour. They don't have a lot of health. They don't have improved Repair Parties. VERDICT: Get hit, take cit. Agility Top Speed: 29.5kts Turning Radius: 730m Rudder Shift Time: 14s 4/4 Engine Speed Rate of Turn: 4.7º/s at 22kts (Dunkerque) or 22.2kts (Strasbourg). What a difference a tier makes. Strasbourg and Dunkerque both have excellent agility for a battleship. Not only do they have a respectable top speed -- nearly reaching 30 knots -- but unlike higher-tiered battleships, they are not shackled with a punitive turning circle radius. No matter how you look at it, both battleships handle beautifully. This combines with their very nice gun traverse rates to make keeping guns on target a very comfortable experience. The only real fault for these two battleships is that they flirt with but never quite achieve cruiser-levels of agility. This flaw mostly resides with their rudder shift time which, while not punitive, is definitely too sluggish to affect reasonable dodging metrics. Active dodging is really only ever possible at the extremes of their range. It's a bit of a tease that way, but by any other measuire, their agility is solid. Dunkerque is very fast for a tier VI battleship which helps translate to a good rate of turn despite her larger-than-average turning radius at that tier. If it weren't for ships like Warspite (bae! ♥) and Normandie, she'd be the clear winner. Once you start comparing Strasbourg and Dunkerque to tier VII battleships, it's no longer a contest. Strasbourg is THE most agile tier VII battleship, bar none. Lyon and Gneisenau provide some competition, but Strasbourg is the hands down winner. VERDICT: Some of the best mid-tier battleship agility you'll find out there. Both ships handle beautifully and are very comfortable to drive. Anti-Aircraft Defence Flak Bursts: 3 explosions for 1,330 damage per blast (Dunkerque) or 1,400 per blast (Strasbourg) at 3.5km to 6.0km. Long Ranged (up to 6.0km): 84dps at 75% accuracy Medium Ranged (up to 3.0km): 24.5dps (Dunkerque) or 21dps (Strasbourg) at 75% accuracy Short Ranged (up to 1.5km): 105dps at 70% accuracy I'm going to let the graphics do the talking here. Kay, so this looks like a hot mess and there's value in this chaos too. There are so many disparate AA range values at tier VI, it's hard to keep track. "Why so much negative space?" you might ask. Well, I scaled this to match the AA values of the tier VII battleships as both tier VI and VII battleships have to contend with tier VI and VIII aircraft carriers. The ships here are arranged in approximate level of effective personal defense, sorted by the formula [ AA DPS * ( range - 1km) ], thus putting more value on longer ranged damage output. None of the tier VI battleships could be said to have "good" or "effective" AA firepower, even against tier VI carriers. While Dunkerque sits in the middle of the pack here, she's in the bottom half of the incompetent. The best thing about her, really, are those 6km ranged guns which can help a friend out with overlapping fields of fire. Strasbourg has worse personal AA firepower than Nagato. It's only when battleships get to California or Florida levels of AA firepower that they can start looking towards their own defense. And it's not like these ships can prevent CVs from dropping on them -- oh no, they simply make it expensive (and then only if they haven't had most of their medium and small caliber guns shorn off by a spray of HE fire). Strasbourg stands little chance and is an easy mark for carriers. VERDICT: Hilariously bad on both counts. Vision Control Base/Minimum Surface Detection: 16.92km / 14.77km Base/Minimum Air Detection Range: 9.58km / 8.62km Detection Range When Firing in Smoke: 14.2km Dunkerque Maximum Firing Range: 18.21km to 21.85km Strasbourg Maximum Firing Range: 19.1km to 22.92km The stealth of these two battleships is crap. I don't know what really needs to be said beyond that. Their surface detection range is atrocious for a ship of their size and you can never truly get it under control. For Dunkerque, this is a more pronounced problem given the smaller maps she end up on at lower tiers. The only way you're surprising anyone in these ships is with long-range fire. While this may end a cruiser in short order, you're only going to annoy battleships unless their citadel protection is very (very!) soft skinned. In practical terms, everything will spot you first. Due to her fragility, this will so often relegate you to play defensively, hugging islands to protect a flank or deny vision lest you get crossfired from unseen enemy. VERDICT: Downright terrible. Final Evaluation Let's go back to those questions that started this review: Is Dunkerque so good at tier VI that she can be effectively cloned and placed at tier VII with little issue? Just how influential are the small changes made between the two ships? Is Main Battery Reload Booster that powerful on a 330m armed platform? Is Strasbourg worth the grind or should you just stick with Dunkerque? The answers to those questions are: Hells no. Largely irrelevant, though the extra second shaved off her reload and the extra armour is nice. I'm kinda miffed about her A-turret losing out on those firing angles, though. Yes. It's a disgustingly powerful consumable and it's what carries this ship at tier VII. Well, that depends. How much do you love Dunkerque? Dunkerque is a good tier VI battleship. This is largely owing to two factors: She has good guns and she has good agility. Dunkerque is fast enough to bring her firepower where it will do the most good and her guns are reliable enough to stack steady amounts of damage. Her fast reload makes her particularly good at picking on cruisers and stacking fires. Yes, her stealth sucks. Yes, her AA power sucks. Yes, defensively she's a bit of a joke. But those, like Tempest Keep, are merely a setback. Stealth and AA rarely define the battleship meta. Better armour would be nice, but it's not like Dunkerque is incapable of face-tanking a whole range of battleship opponents provided they're not armed with 380mm+ guns. Dunkerque is a whole bunch of "good enough" packaged behind comfortable gunnery. As one of the oldest premium battleships in the game Dunkerque doesn't have a gimmick to make her stand out anymore. Being French was her gimmick back in 2016. Since the release of the French battleship line, she lost not only that distinction but also the uniqueness of her all-forward gun arrangement. Players can simply unlock Richelieu from the tech tree if they want to have a taste of that game play, albeit two tiers higher. There's not a lot of 'wow-factor' baked into Dunkerque. She's good, don't get me wrong, but she's not amazing. She's not meta-defining or great. She wasn't a solid pick in tier VI Ranked Battles, sitting behind battleships that brought that oh-so covetted overmatch like Warspite and West Virginia and beyond consideration in team-based competitive (though admittedly everything played second fiddle to Admiral Graf Spee). Strasbourg will be rightly compared to Jean Bart and there is a reason Jean Bart isn't commonly available anymore (I'm still shocked she reappered for Black Friday, but whatevs, clearly WG likes money). If you love Dunkerque's game play, Strasbourg is so worth it, it's not even funny. I cannot stress enough how much the Main Battery Reload Booster consumable improves on what was already some damn fine gunnery. That's really the whole summation of Strasbourg. Yes, there's a bunch of other little changes here and there, but they feel so inconsequential compared to those twenty-seconds of fast-firing guns when her consumable is active. During development, Wargaming seemed oh-so careful not to repeat the misteps of Jean Bart's overpowered self. Strasbourg had her rate of fire nerfed from an initial 21 seconds (yes, really) to 24 seconds and then eventually down to 25 seconds with a slight sigma buff (from Dunkerque's 1.7 to the current 1.8). That should be enough to keep her in line, but I admit I enjoyed myself a lot playing Strasbourg. Such enjoyment on a test ship usually means that the ship is a little too strong. This speaks a lot to what battleship gameplay fundamentally boils down to: delivering big hits. The difference between good performance and bad in a match can so often be separated by a single Devastating Strike. Even if you lose, if you erased one ship outright, it's hard to call that a bad showing. Strasbourg's consumable makes it easier to do that and that's hella powerful. If I had to choose between the two, Strasbourg is (to me) the obvious choice. Dunkerque doesn't have anything novel going for her, in my opinion. Her best selling feature now is her tiering. Strasbourg at least has that gunnery gimmick; something a lot of players may not have access to in the future given the increased rarity of Jean Bart. Strasbourg is a GUDBOTE -- or more accurately, she's a MEHBOTE with a good consumable.
  8. I make no secret that I like the battlecruiser playstyle. To that end, I would like to see more battlecruisers in game, and the natural choices are the British and the Germans. German battlecruisers were generally better armored than their British counterparts, with smaller guns. The are counted as Battleships in game and the line branches off from the main German line via the engines of the Kaiser. Pros +Good armor +Better Acceleration than Tech Tree counterparts +Potential for Good Secondaries (with modernization) +External belt (as opposed to the internal belt of the later British) Cons -Tend towards smaller gun calibers than British Counterpart -Few barrels (After Moltke, never more than 8) -After Mackensen, no Turtleback (reliant on coal as armor) Tier IV Moltke-Class Displacement: 22,979t (Design) 25,400t (Full) Health: 40,800 Length: 186.6m (612ft 2in) Beam: 29.4m (96ft 5in) Belt: 280mm Speed: 25.5kts (28.4kts max) Main Armament 5x2 28cm L/50 AP: 7,400 HE: 3,200; Fire Change: 20% Secondary Armament 12x 15cm/45 SK C/09 guns in casemate 12x 8.8cm/45 SK Consumables Damage Control Part Repair Party Opening the line at tier IV is the Moltke-Class. A straight upgrade to the Nassau that precedes him, the Moltke loses a turret, but gains the ability to fire all guns on a broadside if cross-deck firing is allowed, or merely equals the barrel count if not. The armor is largely the same, but the guns are slightly superior and the mobility is greatly improved. Armor and firepower are inferior to Kaiser, but again, mobility is the key. Speed is actually so great in this ship that it might be best to tone down her max if it seems that she is having too easy of a time hunting cruisers. Other factors like reload and turret traverse can also be used to help reign in this potential monster. Tier IV -Premium- SMS Von der Tann Displacement: 19,370t (Design) 21,300t (Full) Health: 35,600 Length: 171.7m (563ft 4in) Beam: 26.6m (29ft 3in) Belt: 250mm Speed: 24.8kts (27.4kts max) Main Armament 4x2 28cm L/45 AP: 7,200 HE: 3,200, Fire Change: 19% Secondary Armament 10x 15cm/45 SK C/09 guns in casemate 16x 8.8cm/45 SK Consumables Damage Control Part Repair Party SMS Von der Tann, the first German Battlecruiser. While I'd put HMS Invincible at tier III, I put Von der Tann at tier IV because, while lesser than the Moltke, he is still a potent package. One less turret, and with weaker guns and armor, to boot, this ship will still run circles around other, true Battleships. The ship is historically significant for a number of reasons and deserves to be remembered in-game. That I believe he is still capable of holding his own, while being weaker than the tech tree ship makes this a perfect premium choice. I throw my money behind it. Tier V Derfflinger-Class Displacement: 26,600t (Design) 31,200t (Full) Health: 47,700 Length: 210.4m (690ft 3) Beam: 29m (30ft 2in) Belt: 300mm Speed: 25.5kts (26.6kts max) Main Armament 4x2 30.5cm SK L/50 C/08 AP: 8,400 HE: 3,500; Fire Chance: 23% Secondary Armament 12x 15cm/45 SK C/09 guns in casemate (14 on Lutzow & Hindenburg) 12x 8.8cm/45 SK Consumables Damage Control Part Repair Party The first battlecruiser with a fully center-line mounted battery and the trend-setter for the rest of the line, Derfflinger losses some of the edge over his tier mate, the Kaiser, though better acceleration and turning should make this battlecruiser still feel more agile than the true BB. While not a dud, I am not as excited for this ship as I am for some of the others. Tier V -Premium- SMS Seydlitz Displacement: 24,988t (Design) 28,550t (Full) Health: 44,500 Length: 200.6m (658ft 2in) Beam: 28.5m (93ft 6in) Belt: 300 Speed: 26.5kts (28.1kts max) Main Armament 5x2 28cm L/50 AP: 7,400 HE: 3,200; Fire Change: 20% Secondary Armament 12x 15cm/45 SK C/09 guns in casemate 12x 8.8cm/45 SK Consumables Damage Control Part Repair Party The Moltke, but better, I think Seydlitz deserves to be a Tier V premium. With armor to match the Derfflinger-Class and definite cross-deck firing, the Seydlitz sacrifices shell diameter for an extra turret and speed. This would be a fun ship to zip around in, though it might be a little seal-clubby. Tier VI Mackensen-Class Displacement: 31,000t (Design) 35,300t (Full) Health: 52,500 Length: 223m (731ft 8in) Beam: 30.4m (99ft 9in) Belt: 300mm Speed: 28kts (Possibility of an engine upgrade if needed) Main Armament 350mm/45 SK C/14 AP: 10,500 HE: 4,000; Fire Chance: 27% Secondary Armament 14x 15cm/45 SK C/09 guns in casemate 8x 8.8cm/45 Flak Consumables Damage Control Part Repair Party Launched, but never completed, the Mackensen-Class is the last of the tech tree battlecruisers in this list to be designed with a turtleback armor scheme. A member of this class is already in-game, the Prinz Eitel Friedrich, and it one of the ships that inspired me to make this list. A possible modernization to this class is the addition of 4 twin 15cm and 6 twin 10.5cm should WG design to further differentiate this ship from the P. E. Friedrich. Tier VII Ersatz Yorck-Class [Name] Displacement: 33,500t (Design) 38,000t (Full) Health: 55,700 Length: 227.8m (747ft 5in) Beam: 30.4m (99ft 9in) Belt: 300mm Speed: 27.3kts Main Armament 4x2 38cm/45 LC/1913 AP: 10,900 HE: 4,500; Fire Chance: 35% Secondary Armament 14x 15cm/45 SK C/09 guns in casemate 8x 8.8cm/45 Flak Consumables Damage Control Part Repair Party Engine Speed Boost A Mackensen with 15-inch guns, the Ersatz Yorck-Class is not a fantastic ship, and would definitely be served to have Engine Boost, to keep him up to speed. Tier VIII GK 2 Hela-Class [Image to Come] Displacement: 38,000t (Design) ~43,320 (Est. Full) Health: 62,000 Length: 235m Beam: 30.4m Belt: 300mm Citadel: 240mm Speed: 29.5kts Main Armament 4x2 38cm/45 LC/1913 AP: 10,900 HE: 4,500; Fire Chance: 35% Secondary Armament 16x 15cm/45 SK C/09 guns in casemate 8x 8.8cm/45 Flak Consumables Damage Control Part Repair Party Hydro-Acoustic Search Engine Speed Boost The GK 2 is what was wanted instead of the Ersatz Yorck-Class, though the Mackensens were too far into production and it was thought that it would be better to continue their construction. After a fictional modernization, it should be possible to give this ship Bismarck-esque secondaries. Tier VIII -Premium- GK 11 Hetzog von Falkenstein-Class http://www.dreadnoughtproject.org/plans/SM_Studienentwurf/GrosseKreuzer_11_100dpi.jpg Displacement: 37,000t (Design) ~42,180 (Est. Full) Health: 60,700 Length: 230m Beam: 31.0 Belt: 300mm Citadel: 200mm Speed: 28kts Main Armament 4x2 38cm/45 LC/1913 AP: 10,900 HE: 4,500; Fire Chance: 35% Secondary Armament 16x 15cm/45 SK C/09 guns in casemate 8x 8.8cm/45 Flak Consumables Damage Control Part Repair Party Engine Speed Boost This is the last design that I could find that had turtleback armor. GK 1-3, 6-10, and 12 do not, instead relying on coal stores to act as extra armor. This extends to the other GK series designs that I could find. For his extra survivability, I think it would be fair to take away his Hydro, since it would help differentiate the GK 11 from GK 2. A modernization can help make him more secondary-heavy. Tier IX GK 4532 [Name] http://www.dreadnoughtproject.org/plans/SM_Studienentwurf/Schnelle_GrosseKampfschiffe_4532_100dpi.jpg Displacement: 45,000t (Design) ~51,300 (Full) Health: 71,400 Length: 240m Beam: 33.5m Belt: 350 Citadel: 300 Speed: 30kts (31kts max) Main Armament 6x2 42cm/45 SK AP: 13,300 HE: 5,000; Fire Chance: 41% Secondary Armament 8x 15cm/45 SK C/09 guns in casemate 4x 15cm/45 AA Consumables Damage Control Part Repair Party Hydro-Acoustic Search Engine Speed Boost Armed with three two-gun 16.5-inch guns, the GK 4532 is armed fairly heavily. Extensive modernization can be carried out, increasing the ship's speed significantly and additional AA can be placed to increase the ship's secondaries. The GK 4532 has 4 centerline 15cm guns which can be converted into DP mounts. Adding additional 12.8cm twin DP guns will give this ship formidable AA and secondaries. With his turret layout, the GK 4532 is better at kiting away than pushing. Tier X GK 5041 [Name] http://www.dreadnoughtproject.org/plans/SM_Studienentwurf/Schnelle_GrosseKampfschiffe_5041_100dpi.jpg Displacement: 50,000t (Design) ~57,000 (Full) Health: 78,200 Length: 270m Beam: 33.5m Belt: 350mm Citadel: 300mm Speed: 30kts (31kts max) Main Armament 8x2 42cm.45 SK AP: 13,300 HE: 5,000; Fire Chance: 41% Secondary Armament 8x 15cm/45 SK C/09 guns in casemate 4x 15cm/45 AA Consumables Damage Control Part Repair Party Hydro-Acoustic Search Engine Speed Boost The last of the line, the biggest battlecruiser that I could find designed by the German Navy. I did a rough springsharp of this ship, and a modernized GK 5041 could easily fit Grosse Kurfurst secondaries and 34kt speed. This was done without doing the more complex operations, like factoring in the armor taper or the like, which makes me believe that such a modernization would be more than capable of being fielded. Special thanks to @OccultRogue for helping me translate the German.
  9. Hello, I think it is time to give the Asashio the capability to hit battle-cruisers with her torps, like: Kronshtadt, Alaska, Puerto Rico, Stalingrad, Moskva, Petropavlovsk, Yoshino, Azuma, Siegfried, Agir, etc. If they have the same draught, draft, deep (whatever you call it) like a BB, then Asashio torps should hit them. It's logic.
  10. Lexington-class battlecruiser I think this would be a very exciting option for a tier V-VII American Battleship. Here is a little info about it. Final Design SpecificationsDisplacement: 44,638 tons full load; 51,217 tons emergency full loadDimensions: 874 x 105 x 31 feet/266.5 x 32.1 x 9.5 metersPropulsion: Turbo-electric, 16 295 psi boilers, 4 shafts, 180,000 shp, 33.25 knotsCrew: 1297 (1326 as flagship)Armor: 7 inch belt, 1.5-1.75 inch deck, 5-9 inch barbettes, 5-11 inch turrets, 6-12 inch CTArmament: 4 dual 16"/50cal, 16 single 6"/53cal, 4 single 3"/50cal AA, 4 21 inch torpedo tubes (above water), 4 21 inch torpedo tubes (submerged) Concept/Program: A group of six large battlecruisers ordered in 1916 as fast "battle scouts", part of a large program of fleet scouting ships, which included many smaller cruisers and destroyers. These ships were essentially scaled up from contemporary cruiser designs, rather than scaled down from battleship designs, as was typical foreign practice. The ships would have been large and powerful, but poorly protected and thus vulnerable in battle. By 1921 the weaknesses of the design, and of the type in general, were apparently recognized, and consideration was given to either converting some of the ships to aircraft carriers or building new carriers using materials assembled for the battlecruisers. Ultimately all six were cancelled under the Washington Treaty, and two were completed as carriers. Class: Sometimes identified as the Constellation class, apparently because Constellation (CC 2) was the first to be laid down. These were the only US Navy ships to which the battlecruiser classification was applied. The designation "CC", which was not formally applied until the 17 July 1920 fleet redesignation, is thought to have been derived from "Cruiser, Capital", indicating their status as capital ships. Design: The original (1916) design for these ships was quite different from their final design. In 1916 the planned specifications were: 36,350 tons full load with 10 14"/50cal and 18 5"/51cal guns, very light armor, half of the 24 boilers located above the protective deck, and seven funnels. The entire program was suspended in 1917 to facilitate construction of merchant ships for WWI service. The class was completely redesigned 1917-1919, taking into account improved technology such as watertube boilers, foreign development of more powerful ships, the need for improved armor and anti-torpedo protection, and the lessons of Jutland. The resulting design was considerably better than the original version, but still relatively lightly armored. Why should the Lexington Battlecruiser be in the game as a regular ship and what historical and game play benefits does it add? The Lexington was meant to be part of the greatest battle fleet that never existed. This battle fleet was to consist of 6 ships of the South Dakota’s class with 4 triple mount 16.5” guns, 4 ships of the Colorado Class with 16” guns, 6 ships of the Lexington Class battle cruiser with 4 triple mount 14” guns, followed up by another nine battle ships from the Nevada, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, and California classes with 14” guns. This Battle fleet would have been superior to any single battle fleet in the world, including the one ran by the Royal Navy. This fleet was never built due to the limitations of the 1922 Washington Naval Treaty that put a limit on the total tonnage of the Battle Fleets for the US Britain Japan, France and Italy. For the British this treaty was about not being out paced by the economic and industrial might of the US and it’s planned battle fleet it was building, for the US it was about limiting the size of the Japanese fleet to a manageable level to maintain control of the pacific. Given the fact that these ships were never able to be built how cool would it be to be able to play what could have been. The Lexington was not just a paper ship it was actually on order and partially built when it and its sister ship were converted to aircraft carriers the Lexington and Saratoga which went on to play significate roles in WWII. Another important factor for the Lexington being added is the many design changes and the different upgrades that can be associated with the ship class. “Like the South Dakota-class battleships also included in the 1916 Act, their construction was repeatedly postponed in favor of escort ships and anti-submarine vessels. During these delays, the class was redesigned several times; they were originally designed to mount ten 14-inch guns and eighteen five-inch guns on a hull with a maximum speed of 35 knots (65 km/h; 40 mph), but by the time of the definitive design, these specifications had been altered to eight 16-inch guns and sixteen six-inch guns, with a speed of 33.25 knots (61.58 km/h; 38.26 mph) to improve hitting power and armor (the decrease in speed was mostly attributed to the additions of armor).” Here Are just a Few of the Different looks from the redesigns With the level of design and redesign the sheer amount of historical documentation on this ships class would be massive, which could support the high level of historical accuracy of any WG recreation. The Lexington was order as a direct response to the Japanese Kongo Battle cruiser (which may be in the game). The design of the Lexington was heavily based on and an improvement of Britain Invincible class battle cruiser, which will most likely be added to the Britain line. Hopefully if we can get enough people interested in the Lexington Battlecruiser War Gaming seriously considering add this amazing ship.
  11. So I’ve been working on a side project on my own for the past 6 or 7 years where I have been coming up with ideas for a fictional alternate history series. I had an idea for a German battlecruiser design that combines the designs (both external and internal designs and the armor layout) of the German battleship Bismarck (using wows’s B hull upgrade as the basis for her exterior design) and the British battlecruiser HMS Hood (using her design in wows as exterior basis). My question is what would this design probably look like in your opinion? I would also like photos/reference drawings to be used in this discussion if whoever reads this wants to in order to make it easier to visualize the design aspects used.
  12. In our continuing series of "Will it battlecruiser?" We'll take a look at a nation that frankly, is long overdue for some new blood that isn't a derivative premium: Japan. While Japanese battlecruiser lines have been theorized on the forum before, many of them were derived from the idea that the BBs and BCs needed to be completely divorced from one another and exist in two separate lines, a la Britain and Germany. However, it's important to note that as the oldest BB line in the entire game it also happens to be the most BC forward of them as well. What I mean is that with 3 genuine BCs as part of the lineup (Myogi, Kongo, Amagi) not to mention 2 1/2 premium ones as well (I consider Kii to be kind of a BC, really just at true fast BB) BCs have not only been implemented successfully in WoWs, they've been clear path to the IJN's... flavour if you will in the game. Therefore, my proposal for a BC line would really be more of a split instead of a true 2nd line. Save those again, for Germany and Britain. So lets dive right in with the theorycrafting and see how this could look. Strap yourselves in though, the following ships are doozies! The first thing we need to look at is where does the split occur? Well, conventional wisdom might say it occurs from the tier III Kawachi, as it was a true Dreadnought and everything that comes after (until tier VI that is) is a BC. So just backfill with some other BB designs and you're good to go right? NO! While there are a few notable and well documented early BBs that could fit in that timeframe, including some early Fuso designs shown here: (H/T @Tzoli for all the amazing drawings I'm going to use in this post!) These ships by the way would be armed with 12"/50 and 14" guns respectively so while they would work, I'm not going to incorporate them here. My idea is instead to have the BC--> Fast BB line become the main line and more traditional heavy armor/ firepower BB's be the branch or spur line. Should we ever get to the point where we can start to see BB tiers lower than III at any point in the future, than yes we can revisit these designs to offer a better flow for the BB split. For now though, Kawachi remains a perfectly cromulent staring point. Our actual point of deviation will be with tier VI, branching off of the Kongo as one would expect. Therefore the actual Fuso becomes the start of that new (old?) BB branch, so what then would we see for tier VI in the BC line? Well... What you're looking at are blueprints from the excellent archive of the late Vice Admiral Baron Yuzuaru Hiraga. Hiraga-san was one of Japan's chief naval architects during this time, and had left his entire body of work and portfolio (over 40.000 artifacts in fact!) to the University of Tokyo, much of which you can view online! Why tell you all this? Because Hiraga-san is really going to be the primary source for any other designs that had come about during this period, and, while vague are certainly better than nothing. The designs shown above in particular are various design studies for battlecruisers that will eventually morph into the Amagi-class at tier VIII. The designs ran from project number B-58 all the way to B-64, which became the Amagi. The B-62 designs, with 6 subvariants A-F, are the most likely ones to fill out both tiers VI and VII. Essentially just bigger, longer and faster versions of the Nagato ranging in displacement from 35.000-46.000 tonnes and armed with 8x2 14" or 16.1" guns. Armor also varied to anywhere from 8-10" on the belt, and speed was generally between 32-35kts depending on the subvariant in question. There is more than enough information here to flesh out 2 complete ships for tiers VI and VII, provided they're given the same theoretical refits that the real-steel ships received. Tier VIII then, is simply the same old Amagi, we all know and love: Obviously this will leave a gap at tier VIII for the BB line, the only gap in fact. So what is going to fill that Amagi shaped hole? Well, if you know your ships or have been following along in the forums for a while you'll know that it's the Amagi's smaller, slower thiccer cousin, the Tosa-class: Finally we get to the good stuff. Tiers IX and X. And for those of you wondering, no there won't be a No. 13 design in sight! Instead, we're going to offer some slightly more eclectic designs starting with this one: This image once again is provided to us by Hiraga's archive, but was actually designed by a man named Kikuo Fujimoto. Both men had been part of a program in the late 20 and early 30's to design a replacement ship for the Kongo-class. With the London Naval Treaty looming, the ships were largely derivative in design and all between 25.000-35.000 tonnes to comply with the treaty. Speed would have been somewhat low for Hiraga-san's designs all clocking in at between 25 and 26 knots. In fact, one of these designs is fairly well known and even a physical model of the design was made to show off to the Naval General Staff: Unfortunately, despite the promise of a 10 gun, 16.1" broadside on this treaty battleship, this is not the design I am using. While there is a lot of vagueness to Fujimoto-san's design, it was able to cram 3x3 41cm guns into a 35.000 tonne ship and presumably achieve speeds in excess of 26 knots. But we don't know that for sure. As a backup though, Hiraga-san did come up with an, "unleashed" design if you will to achieve maximum performance within the specifications: This by the way, is the earliest genesis of the Yamato-class. Last but not least, is tier X: Since the Hizen is now going to be a premium in the game, it pretty much takes the wind out of the sails for a so called "light Yamato" that can rather nicely fit in the top end of this tree. So instead, you get this thing. A 67.000 tonne fast battleship from 1934. Designed by a man named Ezaki Iwiakichi, an understudy of Fujimoto-san. These designs were part of a preliminary 1934 program for new battleships, prior to the official A-140 program that would result in the Yamato. The ship was supposed to achieve a top speed between 31 and 33 knots, and be armed with the same 18.1" guns as Yamato. Unfortuantely, not much is known about its armor profile, likely those design specs were lost to time and the war, but it does provide a great starting point for WG to adjust the values as they see fit for a fast, quasi-Yammy. So there you have it. Japan's missing links to create a true fast battleship line. And for those of you wondering why I didn't just find some No. 13 battleship designs to make this, it's simply because these designs are just more modern. They're post treaty ships and just fit more naturally than trying to stuff 1920's era ships into a WWII timeframe, no matter how many fantasy refits you give it. :cough: Vermont :cough:. As always, comments and feedback are most welcome!
  13. Thanks in large part to @Shrayes_Bhagavatula and his recent (And frankly well done) German BB split proposal, I have been thinking about Battlecruisers once again and how such lines or line splits would shape up in the game. In particular, Sharayes' 'Raider Line' of German Battleships, at least IMO, would potentially pair well with earlier, true BC's to create not just a split but a true 2nd line of battleships to unlock for Germany. His top tier conclusions meant that one would only need to backfill down to tier III in order to complete a line, and since there are more than enough ship classes from the era to do so, a BC-->fast/ commerce raiding BB line suddenly becomes very attainable... at least in theory of course. But today, I'd like to start my suggestion with a different nation to backfill BCs with; the US. As we know, there will be an imminent split at tier 8 for the USN Battleship tree, and like many of you I was shocked and a bit disappointed when the ships were announced and shown off a few months ago. "This isn't at all what I wanted!" I exclaimed! "Where's the Nevada, the Tennessee, the real SoDak? Where's our awesome secondary focused, brawling BBs!?!?" Instead what we got was the original South Dakota, a rebuilt, pretend-to-be-a-Montana South Dakota, and one of the freakin' Tillman proposals! Not to say that such ships didn't have their fans prior to the announcement, they most certainly did! Even I'll freely admit I was hoping to see the OG SoDak come into the game at some point as a premium or, something. However, as I calmed down and started to think about it more, it's actually kind of brilliant on WG's part. We have always had a very nice, well put together tech line for the US BBs from a chronological standpoint. Starting from the first Dreadnought, to the standards, to the post 1930 era Fast BBs all the way up to the aborted Montana, it's a very well defined line! And now, we're going to be given a choice: what was versus what might have been. The simple fact is that the 1920 South Dakota-class was the next in line to be built after the Colorado-class and very nearly were, if not for that contemptable piece of paper known as the Washington Naval Treaty. Now, say what you will about the new ships, and they very well could end up being crap as many of the doomsayers are proclaiming, but there's no denial that these new "Super Standards" as I call them, will not only create a more interesting chronological line but also a more significant gameplay choice: continue with the slow, methodical playstyle of the standards or go with fast, maneuverable BBs? And therein lies the brilliance... So if you made it this far, congratulations! If you're looking for the TL:DR well here's your question: 'What the hell does all that have to do with American Battlecrusiers TW?' So glad you asked! Despite the fact that the USN fast BBs make chronological sense in the techline, it got me thinking; can it be extended and make sense gameplay wise? This is where the BC's come in. Since we already have existing tier VIII-X ships, we simply need to backfill the rest of the line as far as it can go. And how far does the BC line for the US go? Lets theorycraft! Starting off at tier VII, we have the most obvious ship to place in our hypothetical American BC line: The Lexington-class: As we all know, the Lexington and Saratoga were rebuilt as CV's so I would go with the name Constellation for this class in the techline. The main feature of these ships are that they are basically the ultimate glass cannons. Roughly the same size and maneuverability as HMS Hood (though slightly faster), Connie would also feature similar armament to Colorado, with 8x2 16" guns though these are the 50cal versions that were also to be used on the original SoDaks (nee: Kansas) Her main drawback is that this thing, other than being huge has only 7"(!) of main belt armor. That's only slightly better than a Baltimore and compared to Hood is equivalent to only her upper belt, whereas her main belt is 12". So yeah, you want to talk about easy broadside citadels, Russian BBs eat your hearts out! And it's this frankly jarring achilles heel that have some saying is the reason the Connie will never show up in the game, she's simply to fragile to to balance properly. But I argue she could be balanced, especially given a hypothetical refit that WG would certainly give her anyway, could make her perfectly competitive at tier VII, playing more like... a long range heavy cruiser rather than a true BB. Now at this point, many people would say "yeah, that'll work. Branch her off from the New Mexico and call it a day!" But Wait! we can still go further down the line! Just like a archeological expedition, we just need to dig a little deeper and get to tier VI where we find: Welcome to the original Lexington-class designs. The drawings you see above are the ships as they had been designed by 1916, only for the design parameters to change the following year into the ships that actually got laid down in 1920. Instead of 8x2 16" guns she was to be fitted with 10 14"/50 guns in a superfiring arrangement of 3 over 2, like the Pensacola-class CA. And just like her contemporary at tier VI, her armor is devastatingly thin at only 5" at the belt. Let me repeat that: FIVE. INCHES. It's the same armor thickness as the New Orleans at tier VII, in a ship four times it's size. Now, this does mean that she has an insane top speed of 35(!) knots, but even so. This is a ship of yuuuuge extremes. And just like her big sister a tier higher would likely mean the ship wouldn't play like a BB at all, more like a giant CA with 20% less firepower than the New Mexico. Oh gods I hear you say, make it stop! Surely there can't be more! Oh but there is... digging a little deeper still, we find: This ship was the culmination of a design study that had begun around 1911-12 in response to the IJN Kongo and in many ways was exactly that, an American rebuttal design meant to offer similar capabilities. And as you can see, this ship is rather... reasonable in design when compared to the insanity that becomes the Lexington-class project. Main armament was only 8x2 14" guns, these likely would have been the 45cal ones since they were just coming online at the time, so again about 20% less firepower than it's contemporary BB at tier V, the New York-class. They also feature... reasonable-ish armor protection as well, with a 10" armor belt as seen above. Overall, this ship is entirely sensible compared to what comes next. But is there anything that comes before? Can we go even deeper? Yes, yes we can. This drawing is based on a series of general requirements that had been drawn up by the Naval Design Bureau from about 1909 to design a battlecruiser, using the Wyoming-class as a base. 6 different design sketches were submitted and the end result was what you see above. Congress was never interested in authorizing any money to the Navy to build such ships, only changing their tune when the Kongo-class was revealed to the world. The main armament would be the same 12"/50 guns as on the Wyomings for those wondering. At this point we've pretty much hit rock bottom. I could continue this even further with Armored Cruisers, which were the true precursors to the battlecruiser but as there are no AC's in WoWs yet, that's a story that'll have to wait for another time. Hopefully soon... ;) Congratulations! You made it through the entire rant! I hope you found this interesting and as always, I welcome your feedback and suggestions!
  14. I saw this topic in the EU forums and realized I couldn't post since I have an NA account... so i thought I'd start a topic here since everyone seems to blow off the Agir as a poor ship.... I'm an average player who should know better... I often makes mistakes due to being too aggressive and not waiting long enough to make a push... I find AGIR to be a great ship at pushing caps and stalking island chains since its combo of Hydro, Torps and workable armour makes you a pretty good brawler. I've been using a tank survivability build with a quicker rudder, turrets, and stealth of course. His guns can hit very hard if you aim at the right areas... he has much better accuracy than Odin. Long range I shoot above the waterline at BB's and AP superstructure shots at bow on heavy cruisers.... Inside of 8-10km these guns can often punch thru any BB armour broadside.... With broadside cruiser I find that a little bit of angle... say 10*... mitigates a fair amount of shot that could become overpens... I had to pick up a work phone call while duelling the Riga and made two dumb mistakes... shot the rocks TWICE while trying to multi task... otherwise I should have been able to kill her and made more of a nuisance of myself. She didnt do to bad against the T8 CV.... was able to fend off most re-attacks after the first strike. Note that I only fired one broadside of HE all game... I usually load HE for starters to lit up DD's going for early caps. Secondaries did fairly well, 27% hit rate, and caused 3 fires... for a combined total of 15k damage.... I did NOTHING to buff them. I would also take this with a pinch of salt... as you will see that in the replay... a Bismarck tries to run from me at close range for a song and dance until I showed him what his brother Tirpitz got instead of Hydro... I was also able to tank almost 1.5 million potential damage... not bad for a ship in Cruiser MM... I also find that you get alot more opportunitites for crosffire broadsides on BB's since they have to angle against your teams BB's. All in all I am very happy with this ship so far... she needs to play a certain style but it fits me... also I may be biased towards the chonky Germans as I am basically an Angry Prussian in Space/ Imperial Fist. Appropriate meme for most of my playstyle this game .... 20200614_202938_PGSC519- BEST REPLAY AEGIR Aegir_25_sea_hope.wowsreplay
  15. How about a semi Frankenstein British battleship that has a kind of hull, main armament, speed, about the same armor as the hood, gun lay out as gneisenau, and secondary's and structure as warspite. I am talking about the HMS Renown. Renown was laid in 1916 , she and repulse set a record on being the fastest capital ships upon completion. she didn't see action in ww1, but was overhauled twice in between. during ww2, she was part of the group to hunt the graf spee that was sinking merchants at the time. unfortunately, she couldn't be able to find the ship. She was part of the British squadron that was sent to the Norwegian campaign and came across the Scharnhorst ang gneisenau, she received minor damage but also critically damaged gneisenau in return. She was later part of the search group to find the Bismarck, although the ship did find Bismarck's supply ship. after this she was sent home for repairs and upgrades. after this, she was sent to protect the winter convoys to Russia, then transferred to protect the carriers for Operation Torch. after this, she was sent home to have her aircraft removed and her AA upgraded and added. After this, she helped send Winston Churchill back home. She was sent to the pacific to help in Operation Cockpit and bombarded enemy positions at the Nicobar islands and Andaman islands. She continued with other operations until she was relieved by Queen Elizabeth. She was sent home for another refit but was cancelled. She hosted a meeting with King George Vi and President Truman, and after this she was scrapped and survived a few days longer than the carrier Furious. The Renown that I would like to see in the game is the 1939 refit. The reason for this is because I believe that hood and warspite had a baby and had a extra cromosone from gneisenau. I think she can do well in the game as she will have pretty much the same things as a a regular tier VI regular British battleship but in a tier VII slot right next to hood. naturally, hood would at least be 2 or so knots faster than renown, but dreams can be dreams I guess.
  16. HMAS Australia is a Indefaticable-class battlecruiser HMAS Australia (1911) Ship Specs: Length: 590 ft (179.8 m) Width: 80 ft (24.4 m) Draught: 30 ft 4 in (9.2 m) at maximum Displacement: 18,500 full load 22,130 deep load * :\ * Armaments: 4 x 2 BL 12 in Mk X guns (2 is centerlined and the other 2 are winged staggering diagonally) 16 x 1 BL 4 in Mk VII guns (1915) 1 x 1 3 in 20 cwt anti-aircraft gun (1917) 1 x 1 4 in AA gun (1920) *both previous AA guns were replace by these guns* 2 x 1 BL 4 in MK V guns *she also carried 2 x 1 18 in submerged torpedo tubes with 12 torpedoes* Armor: Belt: 4-6 in (102-152 mm) Decks: 1.5-2.5 in (38-64 mm) Barbettes and Turrets: 7 in (178 mm) *note, I want to point out that Australia has biplanes in a covered hangar on top of Q turret, and I am unsure if I want to add it to the list, should I?* Machinery Specs: Propulsion: x4 shafts with 2 steam turbine sets Power: 44,000 hp (designed) 55,000 hp (actual) Speed: 25 knots (designed) 26.89 knots (actual) Range: 6,690 nmi @ 10 knots
  17. Well, the model has arrived and the photos are in from SD Model Makers. She is 30” long, so just under 1:350 scale. Something like 1:34896 or whatever. For those of you who don’t know, the Lexington -class aircraft carrier, or CV, was originally supposed to be a battlecruiser, or CC. The model is is being built in a configuration that suggests what she might have looked like as a CC in USN service in early 1941. ARMAMENT: x8 16”/50 main guns. x10 6”/53 secondary guns. x10 5”/25 heavy AA guns. x6 1.1”/75 “Chicago Piano” medium AA guns. x19 Water cooled M2 .50 caliber BMG light AA guns. Enjoy! P.S. This is an article I made a while back about having this ship added into WoWS. Check it out if you like the Lady Lex.
  18. Well, the preliminary photos are in from SD Model Makers. Some additions and alterations still need to be done, but she is coming along nicely. She is 30” long, so just under 1:350 scale. Something like 1:34896 or whatever. For those of you who don’t know, the Lexington -class aircraft carrier, or CV, was originally supposed to be a battlecruiser, or CC. The model is is being built in a configuration that suggests what she might have looked like as a CC in USN service in early 1941. ARMAMENT: x8 16”/50 main guns. x10 6”/53 secondary guns. x10 5”/25 heavy AA guns. x6 1.1”/75 “Chicago Piano” medium AA guns. x19 Water cooled M2 .50 caliber BMG light AA guns. Enjoy!
  19. In 1935, the British built Battlecruiser Kongo was dry docked to be uparmored. With the reconstruction complete in 1937, the Kongo was reclassified as a "Fast Battleship". But were the Kongos even worthy of that classification? She had a main armor belt of 203mm, and turret armor of 254mm and barbette armor of 229mm. For comparison, the Dunkerque, which as conceived as a Battlecruiser in concept (meant to counter the Panzerschiff) seemingly had thicker armor. The Dunkerque had a main armor belt of 225mm, turret armor of 330mm, and barbette armor of 340mm. And it has been said that the Dunkerque could not even resist the 11" guns the Scharnhorst or Gneisenau. The Dunkerque was officially classified as "navires de ligne" but given what she was designed to do, and what her armor could and could not resist, it would be fair to term her a Battlecruiser. But...if the Dunkerque has thicker armor then the Kongo, and the Dunkerque can't even resist the smallest of post-dread Battleship main-battery guns, then can the Kongos truly be considered "Fast Battleships? Was this just propaganda? Is there more to the armor scheme of the Kongo's then general armor thickness? Just what kind of guns could the "Fast Battleship" Kongos even resist?
  20. Tomorrow, the fourth and final part of the Prinz Eitel Freiderich missions are available. Four million credits per nation, and I have mostly tier 6 ships for each nation (or something equivalent) for almost each nation. I have no Italian, Polish, or Commonwealth ships of equivalent tier. I do, however, have the Graf Spee, Aigle, and October Revolution. For those ships, which of them are my best chances of earning 4 million credits before the missions end?
  21. ST. Balance changes. American cruiser Alaska. According to the results of testing, the American cruiser will receive some improvements: The rudder shift time has been reduced from 13.8 to 13.1 seconds; Detection reduced from 16.2 to 15.5 km; Detection when firing from smoke is reduced from 12.78 to 12.09 km; Turret rotation speed is increased from 5 to 6 degrees per second; Firing angles increased and improved. Fire duration on Alaska, as well as on other similar ships (Stalingrad, Kronstadt), is increased from 30 to 45 seconds. So buffs and a nerf on fire time. https://www.facebook.com/wowsdevblog/?fb_dtsg_ag=AdyTXH7Ngp7M8oZspdqfCedkKKpm62urnqr-iu2pwI6jpA%3AAdw7_GRgRGxrF6A4cGjWX_aYLdJ68-yjHWMz-vWEJYo-kw
  22. A_Horde_of_Sharks

    Ishizuchi Fanclub

    Let's give a few cheers for the alright-ish dreaded vegetable Battlecruiser! This is my go-to ship for clubbing due to it's hilarious fire chance and surprisingly good armament for killing dds... She is certainly not easy to play for most however. It is certainly an acquired taste! -Don't skip your vegetables!
  23. SayWhatAgainMF

    Please help me Identify this ship

    Good day all, I have recently found a pile of old negative pictures from my great grand-father and after submitting them to the Historical Society of my hometown due to the significance of a lot of them, they came along a picture of a warship, unidentified. The location on the picture is on the St-Lawrence river in between Quebec City (across the river). The picture was taken from the southern shore (city of Lévis). So anyway, judging by the picture we can almost clearly see the British naval ensign at the stern. The picture was taken in August 1919 so right after the Great War. Judging by the smoke stacks and the number of portholes and turrets and the masts, it seems to me like it is the HMS Renown 1918 refit version. So the first picture is my great grand-father's one, the second picture is from Wikipedia so basically the Renown circa 1918, the third image is the Renown blueprints 1918 version and the last picture is the Sister ship HMS Repulse. I would like to know your opinion if you think I am wrong to suspect it is one of the two ships, HMS Renown or HMS Repulse and why. Of course I will most definitely end up looking at the city's Archive to try and find the port's logs from that era and have a definitive answer to give the historical society. In the meantime, your help would be most appreciated. The picture is compressed on the forum and is only 197kb so if you would like to see the original picture please leave me a message in private and I will send it to you. Thank you
  24. Hi Well I know its only been 2 days but the fact this ship is now in testing on the server means that she may be not that far away from going live ( famous last words think T-61 ). Anyway come all you CC's and ST's get this beauty out and about so us everyday people can have a glimpse of her in action. regards
×