Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'british'.



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

Calendars

  • World of Warships Event Calendar

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 19 results

  1. Had this on the backburner for a while... what better time to finish than when new CVs are out! Enjoy or don't enjoy Other mehbote reviews: Myogi Monarch
  2. So a chat in the Warships Discussion / aircraft carriers section of the forums appears to have revealed that the new British tree of aircraft carriers are not getting their one defining feature: armoured hangars. I know this is an arcade game, not a simulator. But this kind of guts the entire character of ships such as HMS Indomitable, Implacable and Audacious. They were built to primarily operate under the air umbrella of enemy land airfields as neither Germany or Italy had advanced carrier programs. These theatres of war also exposed all shipping to rapid raids from destroyers and light cruisers. So the 1930s pre-radar solution to this was to turn the entire hangar into a magazine. In the case of HMS Illustrious, it was surrounded by 4.5 in armour on the sides, and 4.5in armoured roller doors on the front and back. The top was capped by a 3in deck. Later ships cut this hangar side armour down to 2.5 and 1.5in in order to free up weight for an extra hangar deck. The point was to protect the volatile hangar (as so amply demonstrated by USS Bunker Hill and Franklin) from destroyer and light cruiser gunfire, as well as 250kg (and to a lesser extent 500kg) bombs. It was also to prevent damage to the rest of the ship spreading into the deadly hangar. All these scenarios were born out by their actual WW2 combat experience. In a World of Warships setting, this would cause destroyers and cruisers to have a harder time of sneaking behind the lines for a quick carrier kill, as would the 16x 4.5in guns that could shoot across the deck for full broadsides.(But, yes, it would also make these ships citadel pinatas to heavier shells) Even so, such resistance to lighter ships would give Illustrious, and to a lesser extend Indomitable and Implacable, something of an advantage in the 'World of Tanks on a Lake' maps, especially when combined with 'unlimited' air groups. I guess this could explain why Wargaming may have chosen not to armour the British carrier hangars, if these models supplied kindly by Mofton, tell the whole tale. But it makes me think ... I may as well play a carrier design that gets the benefit of the weight dedicated to its armour (USN, IJN, Germany) instead of one that only gets the negatives (lower speed, smaller size and hp pool etc).
  3. Hello all! Recently I was doing some digging on my favorite ocean liner/ aircraft carrier combo, HMS Campania. Built in 1893 as a Cunard Line ocean liner, she was converted into one of the worlds first aircraft carriers. She could carry and launch four float planes. I honestly think there would be real potential for her in game as a British tier III premium aircraft carrier. With only four aircraft on board, I think it would balance nicely with the weak AA of the lower tiers. I also think her unique launching mechanics could be fun. Definitely would be a very unique ship to play.
  4. The following is a review of HMS Gallant, a ship kindly provided to me by Wargaming. This is the release version of the vessel and these stats are current as of July 19th, 2017. Are you excited? I'm excited! More Royal Navy ships! Whoo! Quick Summary: A small, agile destroyer with an uninspiring main battery. She has a heavy torpedo armament with the ability to launch each fish individually, but she's held back by poor launch angles. Cost: Bundles started at $21.99 USD with a port slot. Patch and Date Written: June 8th, 2017 to July 18th, 2017, Patch 0.6.6 to 0.6.7.1 Closest in-Game Contemporary Gaede, Tier VI German Destroyer Degree of Similarity: Clone / Sister-Ship / Related Class / Similar Role / Unique As much as I would like to compare these to the Polish Grom-class, Gallant shares a lot in common with Ernst Gaede, the tier VI German Destroyer, especially when the German ship is armed with its (admittedly awful) 128mm guns. Am I foreshadowing bit? PROs Gallant has an 8% chance per shell to start fires and the highest Fires per Minute chance of any Tier VI DD. Powerful torpedo armament doing 15,433 damage per hit, with 8.0km range and 61 knot top speed. Torpedoes may be dropped individually in the same manner of Royal Navy cruisers. Tiny turning circle of 540m with excellent rudder shift time of 3.0s. Second best surface detection range at her tier of 6.8km. Small target -- less than 100m long. CONs Small hit point pool of 12,000hp. Weak main battery armament of four 120mm guns and low DPM. Short 10.2km range and clumsy firing angles on #4 turret. Worse shell ballistics than the American 127mm/38s with even more "float". Horrible fire angles on her torpedoes with a maximum forward fire angle of 68º off the bow. High learning curve with making optimal use of her torpedoes. An absolute laughable lack of any credible AA power. HMS Gallant surprised me when she was announced to be coming to World of Warships. As fighting vessels go, she was in the thick of the action in the early part of the war but she didn't participate in any major surface engagements as far as I could tell. It made me wonder why we were seeing Gallant represent the G-class destroyers in World of Warships when there were examples such as Glowworm which saw surface action against capital ships to draw from. Everything began making sense when the Dunkirk Scenario was unveiled. She's not the first British premium destroyer released in the game (that honour goes to HMS Campbeltown at tier III), nor is she first British-built destroyer in the game (that distinction goes to ORP Blyskawica). What she does provide, however, is a glimpse of what the British destroyer line may end up being in the future. It remains to be seen how many of the features on HMS Gallant will become standard to the British destroyers. Sharkbait_416 of the World of Warships wiki team has volunteered to join me in this review. He'll be providing a look into HMS Gallant's history and his impressions of the ship. Take it away! The Sharktank HMS Gallant, hull pennant H59, was a G-Class destroyer of the Royal Navy, launched on August 26, 1935. With the outbreak of WWII in 1939, Gallant began operating in the North Sea, primarily tasked with escort and patrol duties. Throughout the course of these duties, Gallant participated in rescue operations which saved the crews of multiple stricken ships, such as SS British Councillor, SS Santos, and HMS Princess Victoria. On May 25, 1940, Gallant was detached from North Sea operations to partake in Operation Dynamo, the evacuation of Allied forces from Dunkirk. On May 26, Gallant arrived in the channel. On May 27, Gallant and HMS Vivacious were notified that ORP Blyskawica was tasked to meet them. The Admiralty wanted the three ships to enter the port of La Panne to evacuate RAF personnel. However, Blyskawica was unable to locate the two British ships. The next day, Gallant embarked troops and transported them to Dover. Gallant made a second trip to Dunkirk on May 29, embarking more troops. Prior to arriving at Dover, Gallant was attacked by Luftwaffe dive-bombers. Despite suffering slight damage, Gallant managed to return to Dover under her own power. In total, Gallant rescued 1,466 personnel from the beaches of Dunkirk. In June 1940, Gallant assisted in the search for Scharnhorst and Gneisenau but was unable to locate the two German ships. In July, Gallant was tasked for duty in the Mediterranean, where she joined Allied forces to assist in operations in the West Mediterranean Sea. On October 20, 1940, Gallant used depth charges to assist in sinking the Italian submarine Lafolè. On November 27, Gallant fought in the Battle of Cape Spartivento as a part of Force B. While supporting convoy operations in the Straits of Sicily off Pantellaria, Gallant hit a mine on January 10, 1941. The force of the explosion tore the bow from the ship, killing 65 crewmen and injuring 15. The remainder of the ship was towed stern-first to Malta. Gallant began undergoing repairs, continuing into 1942. On April 5, 1942, a bombing raid resulted in a near miss that severely damaged Gallant. Due to extensive damage, Gallant was declared a constructive total loss. Gallant was used as a blockship in St. Paul’s Bay and scrapped in 1953. Rerences: http://uboat.net/allies/warships/ship/4391.html & http://www.naval-history.net/xGM-Chrono-10DD-25G-HMS_Gallant.htm Picture courtesy of Wikipedia. Options Gallant uses the same Smoke Generator consumable as the Japanese and Soviet Destroyers. This differs from Campbeltown, the other British premium, whose Smoke Generator echoes that found on American Destroyers. On the USN DDs. the emission time is longer and so is the duration of each individual cloud. This isn't the case on HMS Gallant. So, everything is standard here. Consumables: Damage Control Party Smoke Generator Engine Boost Module Upgrades: Four slots, standard cruiser upgrades Premium Camouflage: Type 10, tier VI+ Standard. This provides 50% bonus experience gains, 3% reduction in surface detection and 4% reduction in enemy accuracy. Remember to equip as many premium consumables as you can reliably afford on a per-match basis. The module options you'll be using are the standard fare for destroyers. In your first slot, take Magazine Modification 1. Seriously, don't take take Main Armaments Modification 1 unless you're going into Ranked and taking Juliet Charlie signals -- you're more likely to have your entire destroyer blown out from underneath you before you permanently lose one of your weapon mounts to direct damage. This way you can mitigate some of those detonations. In your second slot, Aiming Systems Modification 1 is the way to go. Note, if you're playing the Dunkirk Scenario, you want to take AA Guns Modification 2 for the extra range. It's useless otherwise, but you WILL NEED IT in the scenario if you're trying for 5 stars. Don't skimp out on this. In your third slot, take Damage Control Modification 1. The other two are terrible (not that DCM1 is much better). And finally, in your fourth slot, take Propulsion System Modification 1. If you have access to Super Upgrades, there's only one really worth considering and that's Engine Boost Modification 1. This would replace your Damage Control Modification 1 upgrade in your third slot. Firepower Primary Battery: Four 120mm rifles in an A-B-X-Y superfiring configuration. Torpedo Armament: Eight tubes in 2x4 launchers rear mounted down the centerline of the ship. Gallant's gunnery is pretty close to terrible. They may have decent gun handling and a nice krupp rating on her AP shells, but almost everything else is awful. Her 120mm guns are the smallest caliber at her tier and an armament we would expect on tier IV destroyers, not VI. Understandably, on a per-shell basis, they have some of the worst alpha strike qualities, besting only German 128mm HE shells. With her four guns, this makes her volleys rather anemic. But there's worse to come: The ballistic arcs on her 120mm/45 guns are worse than the American 127mm/38s. While Gallant has better muzzle velocity than Farragut's weapons, the shells are lighter and lose speed more quickly. At ranges greater than 5.0km, Farragut's 127mm/38s have better shell flight times over distance. Gallant's shells take 8.62s to hit targets at 10km compared to Farragut's 8.31s with HE shells. Gallant's range normally caps out at 10.2km, so this slow shell time to distance cannot be seen in full measure without Advanced Fire Training. With it, you'll see shell flight times of approximately 1 second per km traveled at ranges in excess of 10km. This makes Gallant's guns utterly ill-suited to engaging anything short of a slow turning Battleship or Carrier at range. You can largely forget about making use of AP except at stupidly close ranges where you'd be better of dumping fish into them instead. To engage enemy destroyers, she needs to be close -- ideally no more than 7km to 8km at most before the lead times greatly inhibit accuracy. And more often than not, she will not want to engage enemy destroyers in the first place. Gallant has two saving graces where her guns are concerned. She has a decent (but not great) rate of fire. With a 5.0 second reload, she can put out twelve rounds per gun. So while she may not be able to compete with any of her peers on a per-volley basis, she can out-muscle Japanese destroyers in a protracted gunnery duel through sheer volume of fire. On paper, she should also be able to compete with Ernst Gaede, the German tier VI, however in practice this often proves to be a fool's errand. Gaede's guns have better ballistic arcs and, more importantly, a lot more health. The second saving grace is more memorable. Gallant has a very high chance to set fires per shell. At 8% per hit, when coupled with her four guns and rate of fire, Gallant becomes the best potential fire starter at tier VI. While this will not help her against enemy destroyers, it does speak to a specialization which favours making the lives of enemy Battleships quite miserable. Overall, Gallant is only a better overall gun platform than Fubuki and Hatsuharu which is pretty poor marks. She edges out Shinonome too, but only just. She needs to force a slug fest to out perform the IJN premium. The reliable 6-gun alpha strikes are quite valuable as they can often decide a duel against a mid to low health enemy destroyer, forcing them to back off even if they have a DPM advantage. It's Gallant's ability to set fires which really redeems these guns. Without it, her main battery would be utterly lamentable. The worst part is that Gallant's guns feel very comfortable to use -- so much so that you might grossly over estimate how well they perform. They turn decently. Their rate of fire is nice. They cause lots of fires. This got me into a lot of trouble when it came to dueling with other destroyers. I'd feel I had the advantage only to see just how uneven a contest it actually was when I got myself butchered. Do not make this mistake. Gallant's guns aren't good. They're not terrible, but they can cause you more problems than they'll solve. Gallant largely redeems the poor qualities of her guns with her torpedo armament. They aren't without their (oh-so minor) faults. For a torpedo specialist, her range of 8.0km is decent but not enough to make captains of the Japanese destroyers sit up and take notice. Their 1.3km detection range gives opponents nearly eight seconds to react which is alright, but not great. The same could be said of their 61 knot top speed which is perfectly adequate but, again, nothing special or worth celebrating. But here's where things get exciting: Gallant has the same launch options as British cruisers. To be clear, the two fire options for Gallant are a narrow spread or to fire off her torpedoes individually. She does not have the wide-spread option found on other destroyers. It's this single fire option which is so desirable. This greatly increases the flexibility of Gallant's torpedo armament, whether this be dropping more complex patterns for opponents to dodge or holding fish in reserve when a target may think themselves safe from harm. On paper, the advantages of Gallant's single fire torpedoes are many. In practice? Many of these advantages are locked behind an admittedly difficult set of player skills, acquired only from experience and the lessons learned from lots of mistakes. Veterans of British cruisers will have a leg up on the competition here. Gallant's torpedoes are individually hard hitting at 15,433 damage and with eight tubes, Gallant's potential damage for a full launch exceeds all ships with the exception of Shinonome and Fubuki which launch nine. Even so, Gallant's torpedoes hit harder individually than Shinonome, so she's not far behind these Japanese torpedo specialists. The are a couple of serious flaws with her torpedoes. They have a punitively long reload of 96s for one, even for a quad launcher. This is common to launchers with more tubes, and Gallant loses out so significantly to the other torpedo-specialists with shorter reloads on their triple launchers with Shinonome having only a 73s reload while Fubuki and Hatsuharu make due with 76s. The second drawback are the awful firing arcs of Gallant's launchers. They only have a 55º launch arc with a rearward bias. The furthest forward they can target is nearly 70º which is appalling and can really hurt Gallant in close quarter brawls or when navigating through islands. This limited fire sector also means she can't use her torpedoes defensively very well, as she has to present her broadside to dump them into the water. So for all of their good hitting power, Gallant cannot launch her fish often and when she can, you may find yourself fighting the fire arcs of her launchers in order to do so. Summary: Her torpedoes are powerful. Single fire torpedoes are awesome, but it's going to take some practice to make them work. The limited fire arcs of her torpedoes can be immensely frustrating. The only thing saving Gallant's guns from being a complete write off is their good rate of fire and high fire chance. Manoeuvrability Top Speed: 36.0knotsTurning Radius: 540mRudder Shift: 3.0s Maximum Turn Rate: 8.6º per second. Gallant is rather average for a tier VI destroyer when it comes to her top speed, though all of the destroyers with the exception of the Gnevny-class (including Anshan) slot in and around 35.5 to 36.5 knots. What she does have is great handling, however. She answers her rudder very quickly and can throw herself about in the water like no one's business. She's only held back by he modest top speed. She keeps over 30 knots in a turn, though just barely, and this limits her maximum rate of turn to 8.6º per second. DurabilityHit Points: 12,000Maximum Protection: 16mm Gallant's 12,000 hit points sits on the low side of average at her tier. She has more hit points than Farragut or Hatsuharu but less than the Gnenvy-class and Fubuki-class ships which make up more than half the destroyer population at tier VI. Gallant is tiny as far as ship length goes, but sadly she's also rather tall. This combines to make her a comfortable target to shoot at, unfortunately. Gallant does not have the DPM or accuracy over range to afford trading fire with other gunships. This is a risky venture even when she's top tier against tier V gunships like Podvoisky, Nicholas and Okhotnik. Only do so from a position of extreme advantage if you have to at all. Concealment & Camouflage Base Surface Detection Range: 6.84km Air Detection Range: 3.36 km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 5.97km Main Battery Firing Range: 10.18km Surface Detection Rank within Tier: 2nd Surface Detection Rank within Matchmaking: 16th of 34. Gallant has a decent concealment rating. Properly specialized with a 10pt Captain and with her Premium Camouflage, Gallant will get her surface detection range down to just a hair beneath 6.0km. The only ship at her tier that bests her here is Hatsuharu with a 5.8km surface detection range. This is good news for an under-gunned destroyer that struggles to trade blows with any of her contemporaries. Perhaps most impressive is her small aerial detection range which is better than any of the other destroyers at her tier. As a tier VI destroyer, Gallant sits in that unfortunate 'sweet spot' shared with tier VII destroyers where their concealment seems decent until measured up against the ships she faces. She's larger than most of the tier V destroyers she faces, and while she's much more stealthy than tier VII DDs, she finds herself out done by tier VIII gunships like Lo Yang, Benson and Akizuki -- all of which can make her life miserable in short order. It's a rare game where she'll ever be the stealthiest thing out on the water. Gallant is really built for this short-ranged attack. Her torpedoes give her a 2.0km stealth firing window which is enough room to comfortably manoeuvre. Sadly, this does fall within the range of radar equipped ships that begin appearing at tier VII. Skirting too close to the edge of her launch window also puts her dangerously close to the 5.58km range of Hydroacoustic Search on tier VIII German Cruisers It pays to take a moment to study team rosters and identify problem ships lest you trip over them at inopportune moments. Anti-Aircraft Defense AA Battery Calibers: 12.7mmAA Umbrella Ranges: 1.2kmAA DPS per Aura: 4 No. That small cloud of smoke is about to get really crowded with air dropped torpedoes in a moment. Pageantry and Gallantry Thanks to the Dunkirk scenario, there are going to be another build to consider for HMS Gallant, optimizing for achieving 5 stars in the scenario. For now, let me cover the basics for Random and Ranked Battles. As ever, we start with a core build of 10 skill points. Begin with Priority Target to increase your situational awareness when you no longer have concealment. Next, take the destroyer standby, Last Stand to give you passable engine power and rudder shift when these modules get damaged. You have a choice at the next tier. Torpedo Armament Expertise should be taken if you want to emphasize your torpedo rate of fire. Alternatively, take Demolition Expert to supplement your already excellent fire starting qualities on your guns. Do not double up on these at this stage. Finally, take Concealment Expert to get your surface detection down to 5.97km with camouflage installed. Here are the next skills to consider: Tier 1, Preventative Maintenance. For those who hate Priority Target, this can be taken as an alternative. This reduces the likelihood of critical damage occurring to any of your modules (except the Magazine). Tier 2, Jack of All Trades. This is handy for those players that like dropping smoke for their allies. Tier 2, Expert Marksman. This will increase your gun rotation rate from 10º per second up to 12.5º. Tier 2, Smoke Screen Expert. Are you a bro that drops smoke for your big friends in Ranked? Be an even bigger bro with bigger smoke! Tier 2, Adrenaline Rush. This is a long running favourite of many players. It increases your rate of fire of guns and torpedoes as you take damage. At 50% health, this shaves off almost 10s from your torpedo reload and increases your rate of fire from 12.0rpm to 13.2rpm. Always handy. Tier 3, Survivability Expert. This will increase Gallant's hit points from 12,000 to 14,100hp. Note that this won't give you advantage enough to reliably outgun other gunships that are at the same health you are, but it does provide more of a buffer. This can be especially handy in Ranked Battles. Tier 3, Basic Fire Training. Bump up that rate of fire from 12rpm to 13.2rpm. Don't worry about what it does to your AA power. It's not relevant in these game modes. Tier 3, Vigilance. Spot those torpedoes early for your big friends. Tier 4, Inertial Fuse for HE Shells. You can bump up her effective HE penetration from 19mm up to 25mm with this skill. This is enough to stack direct damage against any capital ship you face in Ranked Battles, provided you don't hit the armoured belt, as opposed to being stuck trying to hit the superstructure. Tier 4, Advanced Fire Training. I would recommend against taking this one, but it does have it's uses. This bumps up your maximum range from 10.2km up to 12.2km. Keep in mind your shell flight time is almost 1s per kilometer at those ranges. Tier 4, Radio Location. Like high tier IJN Destroyers, sometimes it's nice to know where the things you don't want to face in a gunfight are likely to be. I personally would recommend the following builds: Random Battles: Core skills (Demolition Expert and Torpedo Armament Expertise both for a total of 13pts). Then take Inertial Fuse for HE Shells and Adrenaline Rush. Ranked Battles: Core skills (Torpedo Armament Expertise or Demolition Expert, not both to start). Then take Survivability Expert. Spend the last six points where you will based on your play style. For cap control, take Basic Fire Training and Adrenaline Rush. For support, lean closer to Vigilance and Smoke Screen Expert. Finally we come to the scenarios. For Dunkirk, you want to emphasize your AA power (silly, I know, but you'll need it). Your core skills look like this: Take Preventative Maintenance first. No surface ships will be targeting you with their main batteries. Next, take Last Stand. The artillery will knock out your engines and steering gears on occasion. After that, take Basic Fire Training to buff your AA power. Then take Advanced Fire Training to buff your AA range up to a "massive" 1.44km. This build is pretty useless for outside of the scenario, but what are you going to do? This "AA Build" only works because of the funny low-health values of planes in this specific scenario, so don't hold any illusions this has any worth outside of it. Some other useful skills include: Tier 2, Jack of All Trades, to help bring your smoke generator off cool down faster. Tier 2, Smoke Screen Expert, to give your allied ships more cover when you drop your smoke. Tier 3, Vigilance, to spot those torpedoes sooner. That's it. This is such a specialized build, I really doubt anyone will have the spare Captain to do it, but maybe you have more doubloons available than sense? When in doubt, you can always suicide-torp battleships at close range. Overall Impressions Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / Challenging / Difficult Gallant is very much like IJN Destroyers where she requires just a little more understanding of destroyer game play to make her perform. She isn't utterly dependent upon her torpedoes for doing damage, but without a good grasp of how best to optimize them, inexperienced players will find this ship frustrating. The good news is that her guns are quite comfortable to play with. The bad news is that her guns will get her into more trouble than not which is a formula for disappointing many consumers. Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / High / Extreme Gallant will challenge players to really master aiming their torpedoes manually without the use of the leading marker. This is a new skill for some players to learn and it will only improve their overall game play. This bumps up her carry potential somewhat in the hands of a true expert. Her guns are also quite serviceable in the right circumstances, but knowing when to fight and when to cut your losses is something that comes only with experience (or spider sense). The Sharktank HMS Gallant can be a thorn in the side of the enemy team throughout a match if played properly. My overall impression is that she is very good at one thing—launching torpedoes from concealment. Her single-fire torpedo launchers enable her to achieve more hits than the wide-spread setting. This is exceptionally useful in launching torpedoes at ships that are bow-on, such as those charging a smoke screen. However, this may also result in missing all torpedoes if they are improperly aimed. Gallant benefits from excellent maneuverability and a tight turning circle, which enables her to weave and dodge incoming fire if spotted. Much like the British cruisers, Gallant is most effective when maintaining her concealment, whether it be in a smoke-screen or skirting her detection range. Her mediocre HP pool and poor gun performance mean that direct engagements with cruisers and other destroyers are not recommended unless in self-defense. Her abysmal anti-aircraft armament rating means that an enemy carrier may freely fly squadrons of planes over the Gallant, keeping her spotted. To have a great battle, it is imperative to pick-and-choose engagements wisely. Because of this, Gallant truly excels when she has a commander that is specialized with Concealment Expert. This provides Gallant with a 2-kilometer stealth-firing window for torpedoes, and ample range for maneuvering and repositioning while avoiding detection. Gallant’s playstyle is very appealing, but it is important that players have a solid understanding of spotting and detection mechanics in-order to utilize Gallant to her maximum potential. She is not the type of ship that can outgun an enemy destroyer in the beginning of the game after charging into the objective. Instead, patience and smart tactics will result in players being rewarded with opportunities to take advantage of Gallant’s primary strength, her torpedo armament. In summary, I feel that Gallant is a strong torpedo boat, but suffers from being situational, especially in matches with aircraft carriers. It requires a patient and vigilant captain who takes note of the positions where enemy ships were last spotted to predict their movements. These predictions are essential in maintaining concealment and succeeding in carrying out ambush style attacks on enemy ships, a tactic that Gallant excels at. Mouse's Summary: Gallant plays closer to an IJN DD than a Soviet or USN Destroyer Single fire torpedoes are nice .. but only if you can aim. They'll be a detriment otherwise. Her guns feel more comfortable to use than her torpedoes, but her torpedoes are more powerful than her guns. Like IJN Destroyers, she becomes more deadly the longer she can survive into the match. If you die early, you're not getting the most out of this ship. Stay alive. Then she'll shine. HMS Gallant is a pretty uninspiring premium. Her gimmick resides solely in her ability to drop single-fire torpedoes. Should the future British Destroyer line have this ability too, short of them having some flaw (like no HE shells), Gallant isn't going to age well. Her guns are okay, but she doesn't have enough of them and they don't hit hard enough. Her torpedoes are really good, but they didn't blow me away. Specializing a ship around their torpedo armament really makes their performance flirt with feast or famine -- either you have jaw dropping, amazing games or you strike out and muddle through with a pittance of rewards. It frustrated me to no end that her guns are comfortable to use and (generally) suck while her torpedoes are not comfortable to use and (generally) rock. If only I could bring the latter to bear more often without finding myself beached or making myself a bigger target for guns / torpedoes / airplanes. If only the former wouldn't let me down when I find myself going toe to toe with anything more shooty than a Fubuki. For all of the average components that make up HMS Gallant, she's not without her charms. The sum of her parts creates a versatile ship that, while vulnerable to enemy destroyer gunships (and aircraft -- but all destroyers suffer equally there), can still manage to be a thorn in the side of the enemy fleet. Success with this ship hinges on how well a player can make her torpedoes perform. And she's got most of the right tools for facilitating that. She's not slow. She's pretty stealthy. She handles like a dream. She's got enough guns to defend herself. In theory, Gallant should work for most players. I wasn't inspired, however. Gallant didn't romance me the same way some other premiums have -- even the lackluster ones. Is that a flaw of the ship? I think so. I couldn't get excited for this ship. Time will tell if I'm proven wrong and the community embraces this one as one of their own. Would I Recommend? PVE Battles How well does the ship maintain profitability in Co-Op modes and how does she fare against bots? Mouse: The big question is how will she do in the Dunkirk scenario? Well, she combines elements of both freely available destroyers. Gallant has the fast gunnery of Anthony and the Smoke Generator of Cyclone, so she'll do alright against the Schnellboots but she'll really struggle to shoot down aircraft unless you've built her with AA pew pews in mind. In regular PVE play, treat her like an IJN Destroyer and you'll do alright. Sharkbait_416: Yes; I would recommend Gallant for PVE battles. At Tier VI, Gallant has minimal service costs. She maintains a fair margin of profitability in well-played PVE battles, but premium consumables should be avoided to maximize income. Gallant fares well against bots due to her concealment. She can provide support to teammates, such as a smoke screen, while also engaging enemy ships with her single-firing torpedo launchers. However, her main battery guns are of a small caliber and suffer from long shell flight times, which makes hitting small and agile targets, such as PT boats, difficult. Random Battle Grinding:This includes training captains, collecting free experience, earning credits and collecting signal flags from achievements. Mouse: It all comes down to how well you think you can perform with your torpedoes. Personally, I would give Gallant a pass here. While she's perfectly adequate when top tier, she's really going to struggle when bottom tier in the same manner as Fubuki and Shinonome. If that's your cup of tea or you can stomach being the (severe) underdog, then go nuts, my friend. Sharkbait_416: Yes; I highly recommend Gallant for random battle grinding. She truly shines with a 10-point commander that is specialized with Concealment Expert. With this skill, Gallant has a 2-kilometer stealth-firing window for her torpedoes. Those who are familiar with single-firing torpedo launchers may be able to hit a target with every torpedo in the salvo. Good concealment and high-damage potential equate to a ship which is highly rewarding for those grinding for XP and rewards. For Competitive Gaming:Competitive Gaming includes Ranked Battles and other skill-based tournaments. This also includes stat-padding. Mouse: Is Gallant better than the other tier VI destroyers for Ranked Battles? She's not better than Anshan or Shinonome, but I would say she's better than Gaede or Farragut in this environment. I'll give her a green-light here, but you'd be much better off with Shinonome or Anshan if you can your hands on them. Sharkbait_416: No; although Gallant is very powerful due to her torpedoes, she is easily countered by aircraft. Additionally, she is not very competitive in a fair fight with other destroyers of the same-tier, due to a smaller pool of hit points and poor gun performance. As much as I like her, Gallant is situational in competitive gaming scenarios. Generally, I would advise players to choose another ship for competitive gaming unless they are extremely competent in maintaining concealment, dodging incoming gunfire, and avoiding overextension on the map. Still, an aircraft carrier can easily ruin Gallant’s match by keeping her spotted with squadrons of aircraft. For Collectors:If you enjoy ship history or possessing rare ships, this section is for you. Mouse: Eh. HMS Gallant has some story to her, but my initial reaction when I heard this ship was coming was "why not Glowworm?". I suppose if you want to own a little piece of Dunkirk memorabilia then snag her up. Sharkbait_416: Yes; Gallant served the Royal Navy honorably. Throughout the course of her service history, she saved the lives of nearly 1,500 personnel and sailors. Though she may not have the fame of other ships in the Royal Navy, Gallant served in numerous operations and escorted multiple convoys before being mined in the Mediterranean Sea. With her addition to the game coinciding with the Dunkirk Scenario, players can recreate her heroic actions in saving over 1,466 personnel from the beaches of Dunkirk in May 1940. For Fun Factor: Bottom line: Is the ship fun to play? Mouse: Nope, I did not enjoy my time with Gallant. Her torpedoes are frustrating to use. Her guns aren't. Her guns suck though and her torpedoes don't. How to frustrate Mouse 101. Sharkbait_416: Yes; Gallant is very fun to play. As mentioned above, a captain specialized with Concealment Expert provides Gallant with a 2-kilometer stealth firing window for her torpedoes. Her single-fire launchers allow for the possibility of hitting every torpedo in a salvo. Gallant does best in battles with a high number of battleships and no aircraft carriers. In such games, Gallant can inflict serious casualties on the enemy team. It’s very satisfying to watch a single-file line of 8 torpedoes swim toward a battleship, knowing the unsuspecting battleship is in for a world of hurt! What's the Final Verdict?How would the ship rate on an Angry YouTuber scale of Garbage - Meh - Gud - Overpowered? GARBAGE - Grossly uncompetitive and badly in need of buffs.Mehbote - Average ship. Has strengths and weaknesses. Doesn't need buffs to be viable, but certainly not advantageous.Gudbote - A strong ship that has obvious competitive strengths and unique features that make it very appealing.OVERPOWERED - A ship with very clear advantages over all of its competitors and unbalancing the game with its inclusion.
  5. HMS_Formidable

    British Heavy Cruiser Design Notes

    1927 PROGRAM (SURREY) The new (10,000 ton) sketch design showed 1,620 tons of armour, compared to 1,100 tons for the most recent A Cruiser Dorsetshire. Magazines would be protected against 8in fire at all ranges below 20,000yds, and against 6in fire at all ranges. The protected part of the machinery would be protected against 8in fire between 7,000 and 20,000yds, and against 6in fire at all ranges up to 20,000yds. The other ship, Design Y, cut power to 60,000shp (six boilers, four shafts). Speed would fall to 30kts or perhaps 30.25kts. Length was reduced again, to 570ft. Hull weight was cut by reducing hull depth… The weight saved in machinery and hull could provide protection for the entire machinery space. The reduction in power eliminated one funnel, clearing the deck for catapults and HA directors. Controller liked the added protection and the improved arrangement… Legend and drawings were approved by the Board on 22 November 1928. ** More details to come ** Arrangements looked similar to Exeter, which benefited from Surrey design process, except she had four twins. Source: Friedman, Norman. British Cruisers: Two World Wars and After (Kindle Locations 3688-3692). Seaforth. Kindle Edition.
  6. I'm posting this question because someone on these forums always seems to hear leaks from the developers - Will we ever get to see the British and German battlecruisers of WWI in tiers 3-5? I don't think the game needs a full line of battlecrusiers stretching to tier ten (I seriously doubt that could be viable). But please, will someone tell me if ships like Derfflinger and HMS Lion, ships that saw more action than most of the bbs in the game, ever be included? Thanks for answering
  7. HMS Vanguard is the ghost of the Royal Navy battleship tech tree everyone wanted to see. Ostensibly, HMS Vanguard was designed to be a tier VIII version of HMS Warspite. However, Vanguard falls short of this aspiration. For a high-tier Royal Navy battleship, she's surprisingly not idiot-proof, with a vulnerable citadel that needs to be protected with angling and manoeuvres. What's most exciting: Her AP shells are wonderful. Wargaming has offered some concessions to both of the fans of the current Royal Navy battleship line. They included HMS Monarch's excellent high explosive shells to Vanguard's arsenal, ensuring that these two players can continue spamming HE without a guilty conscience while everyone else rolls their eyes. I want to thank Wargaming for providing me access to this ship. This is the release version of the vessel and all of the statistics discussed here are current as of November 15th, 2018. PROS Large hit point pool of 71,700hp. Main battery has a quick 25s reload and excellent gun handling. Has the same dispersion pattern as Warspite, Hood and Queen Elizabeth and boasts 2.0 sigma, making her one of the most precise battleships in the game. Excellent AP and HE performance for a 381mm shell, including good penetration and damage values, rewarding versatile ammunition choice. Very fast rudder shift time for a battleship of 9.7 seconds. Improved Repair Party, queuing and healing back more than standard and with fast reset timer. CONS Exposed, above-water citadel. Absolutely appalling firing angles on her main battery. Main battery is only eight 381mm rifles creating issues with overmatching and DPM. AA defense is for self defense only and is concentrated in 3.5km range, medium caliber mounts that are easily knocked out. Large turning radius of 850m and slow rate of turn exacerbates the issues with her fire angles. Overview The maximum rotation positions of X and Y turret (her rear guns). They are not new-player friendly. They're not even veteran-player friendly. Vanguard's terrible fire angles so utterly dominate her game play, I felt the tremendous compulsion to wear white-lace and beg her to be gentle. These fire angles screwed me over more times than I can count. Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / CHALLENGING / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / HIGH / Extreme Vanguard encourages players to sail with their broadsides exposed. With her above-water citadel, you can imagine how well she's going to go over with novice players. You know what? Never mind the novices. The veterans are going to find this frustrating too as it limits the amount of firepower she can dish out when trading. She's a battleship that reward cautious, opportunistic play -- which is review-speak for "hide in the back, shoot when you can and don't brawl". – One of, if not the worst at its tier. This is a pronounced weakness. – Middle of the pack at its tier. Not terrible, but not terribly good either. – Has a significant advantage over her tier mates. A solid, competitive performer. – No other ship at its tier does this as well as this ship. Vanguard has strengths and weaknesses across the board, giving her a rating in Offense, Agility, Anti-Air and Vision Control. It's only in Defense where she stands out with a rating. Her citadel is very vulnerable for a battleship, however she counters this with a the largest hit point pool at her tier and an amazing Repair Party consumable. Options Aside from Vanguard's Repair Party, there's nothing out of the ordinary to be found here. Consumables Vanguard's Damage Control Party is standard for a British battleship. She has unlimited charges. It has a 15 second action time and a 120s / 80s reset timer. Her Repair Party is improved. See the DEFENSE section below. There's a lot to go over. This starts with 3 charges base. Upgrades Optimization of Vanguard's upgrades will see the usual suspects rear their tired old heads. Start with Main Armaments Modification 1. Next take Damage Control Systems Modification 1. You've got a choice in your third slot. As ever, emphasizing gunnery is best so your first pick here should be Aiming Systems Modification 1. However, if you're salty about CVs, taking AA Guns Modification 2 is an okay choice. It's not great, but it's okay. Damage Control Modification 2 is arguably the best choice for most players in slot 4. You can elect to take Steering Gears Modification 2 to emphasize the strengths of her already quick rudder shift time. Be aware this is harder to make use of optimally even if it can yield higher results -- it's easier to tank damage than it is to dodge it, after all. Finally, take everyone's favourite no-brainer: Concealment Modification 1. Camouflage Vanguard comes with Type 10 Camouflage. This provides: 50% bonus experience gains 10% reduction to maintenance costs 3% reduction in surface detection 4% reduction in enemy accuracy. Firepower Main Battery: Eight 381mm guns in 4x2 turrets in an A-B-X-Y superfiring configuration. Secondary Battery: Sixteen 134mm guns in 8x2 turrets. These are superfiring with two forward facing and two rear facing per side. Secondaries Let's start with the small guns. You can largely forget that Vanguard has secondaries. These 134mm guns lack the range, reload time and volume of fire needed to present a credible threat to opponents. This is really unfortunate given their nice shell weight and fire chance. If they had the range or they had the rate of fire, maybe a secondary build would be fun to play around with. Lamentably, it's a mistake to invest anything in upgrading these weapons -- they simply can't do what you need them to. At best they might be able to start a fire on an enemy capital ship that strays too close. However, with Vanguard's high citadel, getting into a brawl is a death sentence, so stay out of secondary range. Main Battery Precision There's so much to like about Vanguard's main battery. First of, there's her precision. Vanguard is a blast from the past, sharing same horizontal dispersion value of the older British premium battleships, including Hood and Warspite. Inside of 12km, she overtakes even the vaunted Japanese battleship accuracy, making her much more adept at picking off close range targets like destroyers. Combined with her 2.0 sigma value, landing hits feels very comfortable, even at long ranges. Standard dispersion test for my reviews -- 180 shells fired at 15km locked onto a stationary target Fuso without camouflage. She was equipped with Aiming Systems Modification 1. Vanguard doesn't quite enjoy the same level of precision as Warspite owing to her faster shell velocity and energy preservation. This gives her a larger vertical dispersion area at all ranges. However, this does lead to improved shell lead times making gunnery easier. Note that Vanguard suffers from a lot of "downward drift" which adds a margin of error to these shell maps as I had to readjust aim with every volley fired. Thus the dispersion area maybe slightly smaller than shown. Shell Performance Vanguard's HE shells don't share the same performance anachronism as her dispersion. They're modern, almost (but not quite) matching HMS Monarch's HE, including her shell damage and penetration. Monarch's have a 1% higher chance to set blazes over Vanguard, though -- don't ask me why. Vanguard doesn't quite match up to the tech tree Royal Navy battleships for fire setting ability. This is good news to me -- it removes some of the brainless quality of HE spam. When you do reach over for her AP shells, you're rewarded with a welcome change from other Royal Navy battleship AP. Like Warspite before her, Vanguard has a longer fuse timer with her AP. This has a few effects. The downside is that she's more likely to overpenetrate soft targets, including broadside cruisers and battleship extremities. The upside is that it provides her AP with increased bite for reaching machine spaces and magazines buried deeper within the core of enemy warships -- especially those with spaced armour protecting their citadels. Vanguard is especially good at punishing broadside battleships at range. Approximate penetration values for Vanguard's AP shells. Vanguard's HE shells are fixed with 95mm of penetration -- not quite enough to punish the few exposed citadels found on high tier cruisers. Inertial Fuse for HE Shells will add a few more ships to the roster that her HE can punish, but it's not worth the points investment. Data pulled from World of Warships AP Calculator. Site linked in the appendix. Penetration wise, her AP shells are well setup, having comparable bite to Tirpitz and Bismarck. It pays to keep their caliber in mind, however. Her 381mm shells cannot overmatch the 27mm bows of American and German heavy cruisers. As good as Vanguard's AP shells are, spamming nothing but won't do you any more favours than if you used HE shells exclusively. Switch shells often in Vanguard and she'll reward you. Vanguard's fast 25 second reload facilitates swapping between ammunition while also padding her damage output when it comes time to cycle her guns. Damage output among the tier VIII battleships is very close. Vanguard keeps pace with her fast rate of fire, compensating for her smaller armament. As ever, take these numbers with a pinch of salt -- they do not represent the challenges of getting shells on target or penetrating when they get there. For whatever reason, Vanguard's HE shells only have a 34% base fire chance as opposed to Monarch's 35%. This creates an increased gap in their fire setting potential and makes Vanguard no better of a fire starter than American battleships. Still the increased damage she dispenses makes this more than worthwhile. Before any of you get yourself all hot and bothered about Monarch's fire setting, Cleveland (the gold-standard of tier VIII burnination) can spit out 9.97 fires per minute with the IFHE penalty and no other buffs. The same disclaimers apply for this chart as the others -- this is merely an indicator of performance and does not represent actual in game results. A myriad of factors will always conspire to mitigate a ship's ability to set fires including (but not limited to), target selection, opportunity, shell dispersion, fire resistance, etc. The Deal Breaker All of these strengths are present to pad for one massive weakness: Vanguard's appalling fire angles. Vanguard has a fast rate of fire, great HE shells, fast turret traverse and excellent precision because her fire angles are so bad. It's all meant to be compensation because Vanguard must present a near perfect broadside in order to fire all eight of her guns at a target. This leaves her incredibly vulnerable to reprisals. She is functionally incapable of autobouncing enemy shells while firing her full armament and instead she must rely on her armour thickness to repel shells. At anything but the longest of ranges, this is a fool's errand. Thus, Vanguard often has to sacrifice firepower in order to properly angle against her enemies. This is why her gun performance is so good: she's often forced to fight with only half of her weapons. Wargaming have done everything they can to make it easier to bring the other half to bear when possible. Her gun traverse is quick. Her reload is fast. She answers her rudder quickly too to help swing her butt out to unmask her guns. I'm not going to lie: These bad fire angles are enough to put me off this ship entirely, which is saying a lot given all of the wonderful perks her guns otherwise enjoy. Vanguard has the same (terrible) forward firing angles as the King George V-class battleships. However, her rearward firing angles are worse than the tier VII battleship. No matter how you choose to engage an enemy, when you use all eight of Vanguard's guns, you open yourself up to return-fire and potential citadel damage. Bad firing angles are one of my personal pet-peeves. I can stomach a lot of things, up to and including sluggish gun traverse, but not bad fire angles. This has greatly soured my opinion of this ship. Summary Secondaries are bad. Her main guns perform beautifully provided you can use all of them. Her fire angles will get you killed. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : I almost gave her a rating here -- that's how bad her fire angles are. However, there's just too many perks glued onto her weapons to make that a fair assessment. She'd need a much faster rate of fire before I would consider bumping this up. Or, you know, completely redesign the ship to give her better fire angles. That would work too. Defense Hit Points: 71,700 Min Bow & Deck Armour: 32mm Maximum Citadel Protection: 356mm Torpedo Damage Reduction: 25% Armour Protection The 356mm/343mm armour is replicated again around her rear magazine. Her turret faces are 343mm front, 228mm side, 178mm rear, and 152mm on top with 305mm barbettes. Let's start with the elephant in the room: Vanguard's citadel sits over the waterline. Much fuss will be made over this and rightly so. Only Roma shares this high-water vulnerability and the Italian ship is much better equipped to angle and bounce incoming fire. The net effect is that Vanguard is more likely to take citadel damage than other battleships when someone catches her side. This isn't to say that citadel damage is an exclusive weakness to Vanguard. However, it pays to keep her vulnerability in mind. Her aforementioned firing angles on her main battery guns exacerbates this problem. When Vanguard is firing all eight of her weapons, whatever she's shooting at has an easy target from which to farm damage. What makes Vanguard's fire angles such a liability compared to other battleships has to do with autobounce mechanics. Let's get technical for a moment to explain why. If AP shells cannot overmatch armour, there's an autobounce check. This occurs before any penetration attempts are made. The angle of the shell is compared to the angle of the surface it strikes. Normally, battleship AP shells that hit with an acute angle of 30º or less will auto-ricochet. This is why bow-tanking is so prevalent -- shells simply slide off the ship's bow and deck, unable to bite into the armour. No matter how much penetration a shell has, if it strikes at too shallow of an angle, your ship can avoid damage. Normally, battleship AP shells that hit with an angle of 45º or more cannot autoricochet. Any shells that strike between 45º and 90º to the hull will follow normal penetration mechanics. In between these two values, the auto-ricochet chance scales linearly. For Vanguard, when she fires her all eight guns forward at a 43º angle, any return fire from her target has only a 13% chance of suffering a ricochet. When she fires all eight guns to the rear at a 40º angle, this improves to a 33% chance. Most battleships are capable of firing all of their guns 35º off their bow, allowing them to ricochet shells automatically 2/3s of the time. The steeper they angle themselves, the better this defense. This mechanic is absolutely essential for keeping battleships safe from the monstrous levels of penetration found at higher tiers. Not only does it provide a better chance of automatically deflecting shells, it adds relative thickness to their armour belts. The steeper you angle, the greater the effective thickness. Vanguard's belt has between 503mm and 522mm worth of protection at 43º. However, if she could fire at 35º off her bow, this would increase to 598mm to 621mm. Data pulled from proships.ru (link in the Appendix). Values are approximate, usually with about 5% higher estimates than Wargaming's values published in their Armada series of videos. You can see by these values that at range, Vanguard makes an excellent bully when top tier -- with rare exceptions, she can unmask her X and Y turrets and fire, confident that her belt will be proof against return fire. This falls away when dueling with tier VIII+ opponents. With few exceptions, they all have the raw penetration needed to best her belt while she fires a broadside. Her citadel protection isn't all bad, though. First off, AP bombs can't citadel you. Hooray! Second, shots that land high that attempt to bi-pass her belt and drop down into her citadel have to contend with a 32mm citadel roof. Only Yamato and Musashi's 460mm guns can overmatch this, meaning that any other shell will skip off the top of her machine spaces for only penetration damage. Thus it's only shots fired directly at her waterline which can damage her citadel. The use of Priority Target is almost a must to alert you when enemies are looking your way to give you time to angle in and protect yourself. Vanguard needs time to stack damage -- to find those moments where she can sit broadside and make excellent use of her precision and rate of fire but don't push your luck when you're taking hits. There's one last little point of contention with Vanguard's protection scheme: With the entirety of her deck and extremities boasting no more than 32mm of armour, Vanguard is a juicy target for light cruisers. Expect to burn a lot if they catch you out in the open. Provided you can protect Vanguard's citadel (and that's a pretty big if), she has the largest effective hit point pool of any of the tier VIII battleships. With optimal use of her consumable, her theoretical maximum (less Survivability Expert) effectively doubles her hit point pool. In practice, you're never going to see that kind of number. Repair Party If Vanguard appears a little squishy, she all but makes up for it with her excellent Repair Party consumable. While she doesn't boast the same portable dry-dock found on HMS Lion, Nelson and Conqueror, she has the next best thing. Here's the bonuses she has baked in: Her Repair Party resets quickly. The reset timer on consumable is 90 seconds / 60 seconds for standard / premium. Compare this to the usual 120 seconds / 80 seconds of the normal Repair Party. She queues up 60% of penetration damage. This is admittedly standard for Royal Navy battleships, so Vanguard doesn't stand apart from the rest of the ships in her line. For most other battleships it's 50%. Vanguard queues up 33% of citadel damage. This is huge. While it would best to avoid taking citadel damage of any kind, Vanguard heals up more than the 10% of other battleships. Keep in mind, this also applies to torpedo damage which is the most common form of citadel damage battleships receive. This is especially good in Vanguard's case given her poor anti-torpedo protection. She heals up to 16.8% of her hit points per charge. Normal Repair Party mechanics heal up only 14% over 28 seconds -- or 0.5% per second. Vanguard enjoys a 20% boost over this like Warspite, healing 0.6% per second over the same time period. With up to five charges at her disposal through the use of premium and skills, Vanguard's faster reset timer ensures that she's able to make full use of her health regeneration. Her enormous hit point pool also guarantees big returns as Repair Party scales with a ship's starting hit point total. Summary For all of Vanguard's potential vulnerability with her high citadel, she's well equipped to mitigate and manage said damage. When she's top tier, the vulnerability of her citadel drops down considerably, making her very powerful. Light cruisers are always going to be pain in the butt, though, and beware HE spam from battleships too. Vanguard isn't done yet with her tricks, though, as you'll see in the AGILITY section below. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : Can a battleship with an exposed citadel even be considered ? It feels a bit of a stretch to me, but if you can keep her citadel protected, Vanguard is hella tough. That's a pretty big 'if' though when she's not top tier. She may lose her current rating when the North Carolina Repair Party buff goes through. Agility Top Speed: 30.0 knots Port Turning Radius: 850m Rudder Shift Time: 9.7 seconds (!) 4/4 Engine Speed Turning Rate: 4.1º/s The big thing to talk about here is Vanguard's rudder shift time. Now I've harped on rudder shift before -- it's a mean to an end, not an end of itself. Boasting that a ship has a great rudder shift time is like boasting that a ship has great range on its main battery guns -- it's nice to have but it's not a good indicator of a ship's performance. The same applies here. Vanguard answers her rudder quickly and her movements are much more precise as a result, but it would be a mistake to call this ship agile. Vanguard's rate of turn holds her back. 4.1º/s is painfully average for a high tier battleship. She sits well behind ships like the Richelieu-class sisters and the South Dakota-class sisters. This is caused by two things. One, her turning radius is big. Two, she doesn't have any baked in bonuses to help her preserve speed in the turn. The upside to her modest handling (and it's a stretch to call this a benefit) is that she can't out turn her turrets. She starts with a 5.0º/s rotation on her main battery guns and Expert Marksman only widens the gap, making adjusting her fire very comfortable if it weren't for those damned firing arcs. Vanguard's fast rudder shift time is almost good enough to allow her to fire her guns and angle back quickly enough to avoid reprisals. Almost. The simple fact of the matter, going from a 30º aspect to a 43º and back again takes too long. I never managed better than 15 seconds during trials. You might be able to pull this off against an inexperienced opponent but this is owing more to their mistakes rather than the merits of the ship itself. If you want to be able to fire all eight of Vanguard's guns while not getting your citadel blown out, you're going to have to play clever. Now just because Vanguard can't wiggle-wiggle-shoot doesn't preclude her from being able to dodge. This is something she's quite good at and where her rudder shift time makes her deliciously unpredictable. You'll still need range in order to pull this off, but you can pretend to begin unmasking your guns in order to bait shots and then double back on your course to bounce their shells. Similarly, the amount of bounce and twirl in her badonkadonk makes her a real nuisance for destroyers to land torpedoes. Vanguard is all about frustrating gunnery -- both yours and your opponents. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : She's not a speed demon like the French botes nor wiggling like the SoDaks. She's also not a thunderbutt like Kii, so there's that. I was personally hoping to see her preserve a little more speed in the turn to get her rotation rate up -- that would have done it, but it didn't pan out during testing. Anti-Aircraft Defense AA Gun Calibers: 134mm / 40mm AA Umbrella Ranges: 5.2km / 3.5km AA DPS per Aura: 68 / 413.1 For personal defense, Vanguard's anti-aircraft firepower is excellent -- comparable to the American battleships. However, that's about as far as it extends. Vanguard lacks the weight of fire with her dual purpose guns to be a credible threat to aircraft further out. This precludes any claims of efficiency with Manual Fire Control for AA Guns -- too much of her flak is focused upon her 3.5km 40mm batteries. This adds a second weakness: her medium caliber weapons don't stand up to punishment very well. If you've taken even a light dusting of HE shells, odds are your anti-aircraft firepower is nowhere near as formidable as it once was. So, while you're pristine and perfect, you'll shred planes. It's worth investing in Advanced Fire Training to help boost this further, but that's about as far as improving her anti-aircraft firepower should go. Hey look, I made it through a section without mentioning her awful fire ang -- aw, damn it. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : She's very close. Were it not for FOUR American battleships all having very similar AA firepower (and Kii besides), she might be able to muscle in and make her presence felt. As it is, she sits in their shadow. Refrigerator Base Surface Detection: 16.04km Air Detection Range: 13.7km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 12.04km Detection Range When Firing in Smoke: 14.73km Main Battery Firing Range: 20.0km There's not much to go over here. Vanguard's concealment is "sufficient unto the task" and nothing more. She sits in the middle of the pack for surface detection behind Monarch (14.6km), Roma (14.9km) and North Carolina (15.7km) and just ahead of the Alabama-twins (16.2km) and Bismarck-sisters (16.4km). Vision Control consumables are rare at this tier, being limited to Bismarck's Hydroacoustic Search and various spotter and float plane fighters found on select ships. Vanguard doesn't have access to any of them and she ends up feeling blind without them. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : More stealth or a spotting consumable other than an aircraft. Alpha and Omega There's not much to say in regards to the skill choices for Vanguard. You can buff up her anti-aircraft firepower if you're super salty about CVs, but on the whole a generic battleship captain build emphasizing fire resistance would serve you better. Start with Priority Target. Take Adrenaline Rush as your second skill. Follow this up with Basics of Survivability at the third tier. For your 10th point-skill, choose between Concealment Expert and Fire Prevention with your 14th point-skill, take the alternative. With your remaining 5 points to spend, customize as you will. Advanced Fire Training will serve you well if you want a little more teeth to your AA guns -- especially when paired with AA Guns Modification 2 from your upgrades. For your remaining 1pt, take either Preventative Maintenance or Expert Loader. Alternatively, you can mix and match between Superintendent, Expert Marksman, Jack of All Trades and High Alert. Keep those tier 1 skills in mind as filler. Final Evaluation She has two main flaws and only two: Her citadel sits high over the water and her fire arcs suck. If you can mitigate these two weaknesses, this boat is amazing. She's been padded with all of the perks possible to compensate for these challenges. If you can't mitigate them, or you find it frustrating, Vanguard is a steaming pile of doo. "The second coming of Warspite" has such a nice ring to it. So many of us were hoping that the Royal Navy battleship line would have borrowed heavily from Warspite's game design -- namely her gun's precision, sluggish gun handling, good agility and improved heals. Instead we got a pack of flame throwers with cloaking devices and portable dry-docks. Complaining about what became of the Royal Navy battleships is so 2017, though. I had pinned my new hopes that Vanguard would be my baebote #2, echoing a lot of what made Warspite great. She almost got there which is pretty surprising. But let's not sugarcoat things -- Vanguard fell short of the mark. This isn't a tier VIII Warspite. So is Vanguard "good"? Well, yes. Yes, she is. However, there's a big ol' butt attached. She's good but she's also potentially frustrating as all get out. I've grumbled enough about her fire arcs. This is a personal pet peeve of mine, if you can't tell. This right here is what would relegated Vanguard to a port-queen for me. For others, her exposed citadel is going to be a big no-no. Why play a battleship that can get her machine spaces easily blown out when you could play something similar that doesn't have to put up with that nonsense? Her inability to overmatch select heavy cruisers will be a turn-off for others. It will keep her from being a contender in competitive play because of it. Finally, her longer AP fuse timer gives her an increased chance of overpenetrations. There's few things as heart breaking as lining up that perfect shot on a cruiser only to watch your shells sail clean through, inflicting minimal damage. One of the ways a premium ship can get in my bad books is by forcing a player to take extra steps to accomplish the same task as other vessels. Vanguard ticks this box. If Famous and HIstorical Monarch can do what Vanguard does and with less frustration, why bother picking up Vanguard? If the comparison to Monarch is bringing you pause, good. The two ships have very similar play styles with the tech tree ship being idiot-proof. I think this is perhaps the most damning thing that could be said about Vanguard: like Monarch, she's a little dull. Thankfully, Vanguard does borrow just enough from Warspite to spare her being called the second coming of the King George V that never was. I'm just not sure it's enough to redeem the ship in my eyes. Her perks are compelling, but it keeps coming back to those frustrating elements for me. I suppose that says it all right there. Know thyself. If those elements seem like turn-offs to you, then stay away. Otherwise, she'll do you no wrong. Would I Recommend? Vanguard acted as the gatekeeper to the initial offering of HMS Dreadnought. If you wanted the latter you had to also buy the former. Make sure you weigh the merits of both ships before pulling the trigger on a purchase like that. PVE Battles How well does the ship maintain profitability in Co-Op modes and how does she fare against bots? Yes. Bots are dumb. Battleships vs bots is always a good fit. Random Battle Grinding: This includes training captains, collecting free experience, earning credits and collecting signal flags from achievements. No. You are absolutely spoiled rotten for choice when it comes to Royal Navy premium battleships. Warspite, Hood, Nelson, Duke of York and Dreadnought are all on offer. Vanguard does have the advantage of being the highest tier, and thus potentially making the most bank, but you could do almost as well for yourself in most of the others. (I can't believe I'm recommending Duke of York as a reasonable alternative...) For Competitive Gaming: Competitive Gaming includes Ranked Battles and other skill-based tournaments. This also includes stat-padding. No. Get yourself Massachusetts or Alabama instead. For Collectors: If you enjoy ship history or possessing rare ships, this section is for you. Yes. She's the last Royal Navy battleship ever -- built in steel and she's drop dead gorgeous. For Fun Factor: Bottom line: Is the ship fun to play? No. I didn't find her fun to play. However, that's because I'm a whiner when it comes to firing arcs. Maybe your own mileage will be different. What’s the Final Verdict? How would the ship rate on oh-so scientific, not-sarcastic at all, Angry YouTuber scale of Garbage – Meh – Gud – Overpowered? GARBAGE– I hate it! Mehbote – An average ship. Probably forgettable. Gudbote – The best thing ever. Totally not overpowered because I like padding my stats in it. OVERPOWERED – I hate playing against it! In Conclusion It's only a week late. That's unfortunately going to be the status quo going forward as I perpetually play catch-up with releases. Since Dreadnought and Vanguard were ninja-announced last week, Bourgogne has been finalized. In addition Charleston was released without any warning, so there are three new reviews in the queue. What's more, the Black Friday ships, Massachusetts, Tirpitz, Atago and Asashio are on their way out. While Tirpitz and Massachusetts' reviews are still reasonably up to date, the changes to the latter two could warrant a revisit. Given the limited access I'm going to have with Bourgogne, I'll probably be prioritizing that one as my next review unless something else comes up. Thank you all for reading. Thank you very much to everyone that supports me on Patreon for helping me produce this content. Appendix Armour penetration data was pulled from two sites: http://proships.ru/stat/ships/ https://mustanghx.github.io/ship_ap_calculator/
  8. Durante un largo tiempo me he dedicado a recolectar información sobre ciertos buques construidos durante, entre, y después de las guerras mundiales y que podrían destacar como candidatos al juego que actualmente nos presenta WG. Traté de meterme en la cabeza de los desarrolladores deduciendo las ecuaciones a partir de las cuales se determina los puntos de vida de cada buque basándose en el deslazamiento de este, aunque como se darán cuenta algunos no concuerdan con los presentados en el juego. Algunas ramas también presentan problemas relacionados con la ubicación de sus buques en el tier adecuado, como es el caso de los destructores franceses e italianos, otros como los cruceros japoneses presentan problemas por la información poco clara respecto a sus desplazamientos en tonelaje. Algunos buques no están situados en el mismo tier en el archivo que en el juego, eso se debe a una diferencia de opiniones personal contra WG. También hay buques que no están dentro de las ramas pero se indican en las tablas o debajo de las ramas mismas, esto se debe a que su ubicación es difícil de decidir. Las ramas están ordenadas por colores y estas incluyen; portaaviones, acorazados, cruceros de batalla, grandes cruceros, cruceros y destructores. Los asteriscos representan navíos que fueron inventados por el equipo de desarrollo de WG o por mi. Las fechas indicadas entre paréntesis indican que el buque es un diseño que nunca se construyó o terminó su construcción y el año indica su fecha de diseño. Esto aplica para casi todos los buques excepto cruceros holandeses de tier 6 y 7 en cuyo caso indica solamente una diferenciación entre buques ya que se trata del mismo barco en sí pero antes y después de su modernización. No se incluyen barcos que pertenezcan a clases ya mencionadas en naciones mas grandes, un ejemplo claro sería el crucero argentino General Belgrano que ya está representado por la clase Brooklyn. Los cuadros de distinto color dentro de las tablas de HP representan tonelajes modificados por WG o por mí haciendo referencia a un incremento del tonelaje original debido a una modernización ficticia del buque. Espero sus comentarios y sus críticas. Compartanlo si lo consideran oportuno o interesante. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1wckrRPErjwJ46erYOaJ1Cx3ycs8AClPx
  9. Today I am going to showcase my experience in the Tier 8 Royal Navy Destroyer, the Lightning. Overall a decent ship, but my experience in it was "something different" compaired to other ships I have played.
  10. Im not sure if its just me but i was loving the british dds. Got the first one and started grinding up to t4 and i was enjoying them and everything seemed great. I then decided to use some freexp to get up to the t7 Jervis and i absolutely hate them now and im not sure what to do or if its just me. I have had every match so far with my ship being disabled more than 75% of the time. yes i have the skill so i can still function but it still hampers the ship alot and regardless things seem to get disabled way way to easily. Ive literally been hit by another dd with only 2 shells and they managed to knock out both my foward turrets, a torp tube, my engine and stearing. all from 2 shells....And this happens all the time. if you get hit at all you will just about always lose something it feels like. So im just not sure what to do. Its just turned from a great fun time into no fun at all.
  11. I love my gunboat DDs. I'm an average at best cruiser player, and only good in some BBs, but my happy place is filled with names like Clemson, Farragut, Z-52, Akizuki/Haragumo, Vampire, Fletcher, etc. I enjoy hunting DDs, controlling caps, spotting and vision control, and such, and I find it's my best way to contribute to wins. I like playing fast and aggressive but still having to be thoughtful about movement and positioning. I'm an average player overall, but in a gunboat DD I can carry games that I am not capable of carrying in other ships. So when it became evident that the RN line would be optimized for the fleet DD role, I was excited. So far....the results are mixed, but I am optimistic for the rest of the line. I won't unlock Lightning until Wednesday as I've completed all the container missions and didn't unlock her, but I've gotten some time with Acasta, Icarus, and Jervis. (Valkyrie looks like it will play similarly to Vampire with a bit more torp flexibility and emphasis, so I'll try her and Wakeful after launch as well.) Here's my impressions of Acasta, with Icarus and Jervis coming later tonight or tomorrow and the rest coming soon (I probably wont have much time to play next weekend so it will be a bit of time before I cover Lightning, Jutland, and Daring.) 'The Acasta Doing Business - Mid-Tier Meh "A lot like T-22, except even more boring and ineffectual" It was evident even before playing them that a lot of the British DDs would have reasonably high skill floors and would be 'better than sum of its parts' boats given the 'fleet DD' niche. Acasta is clearly a step in that evolutionary line, but in her case, sh's likely a 'grindwall' boat that most players will be glad to get out of. Even as someone with realistic expectations and who enjoys that playstyle, I didn't enjoy her. Full disclosure: I played 2 games in her and then sidelined her after unlocking Icarus mission. So maybe others make her work better after some more time, but I have played enough Gallant and enough other gunboat DDs to know Acasta wasn't for me. She's just aggressively meh. She doesn't excel in anything, but neither does T-61 and that's one of my favorite boats; she's just not good enough at enough things to make her fun. Her guns are meh, with a slow traverse and low dpm output making her vulnerable to USN DDs, and aside from the flexibility of her singlefire torps, her torps aren't anything to write home about. You can't launch from stealth except in ambush or at an approaching target. When the cards fall right, you can still devstrike anything easily with 8 torps on the same vector, or easily design your own spreads to improve odds of getting at least one hit. I have used this skill to great effect with my Gallant, but with 6km torps (and 6km stealth even at full-stealth build) I struggled to do so with Acasta. Good players will get some fantastic results out of these torps on occasion when they use single-fire perfectly, but it's going to be rare-ish and you're going to have to work harder to get good torp results than other DDs. Her guns are also a weakness. Like USN DDs, RN DDs have high shell arcs that necessitate engagements at closer ranges than Russian or (to a lesser extent) German DDs. But USN DDs just spank this boat 1v1 in a gunfight. She isn't even competitive with Clemson for cap control, much less Nicholas or Farragut. Her nimbleness helps her avoid torps but you wont dodge much gunfire at that range, and her RN smoke is even shorter because tier 5. Plus, the hydro later tiers get isnt present here. I've played a lot of Farragut and Clemson and know every trick in the book to use torps when you can't *quite* stealthtorp in most conditions, but the singlefire capability doesnt make up for the fairly weak torpedoes here, and her guns just aren't good enough to deal damage when you can't pull off ambushes, unlike the USN boats. This is a boat in which even experienced gunboaters will struggle to do damage on a consistent basis. She's nimble and accelerates quickly, she can use singlefire torps to torp entire smokescreens to flush or kill red DDs or to devstrike a BB from ambush, and she can spot and help kill DDs, but she doesn't beat ANYTHING 1v1 in a stand-up fight except a badly played IJN torpboat, and even then she doesn't have hydro for the extra cushion so her nimbleness is key to not eating torps. I think very good players can make her work very well, and I wouldn't be surprised to see her do well in the t5 ranked season in the hands of a good player. But she's going to uptier even more poorly than most tier 5 boats. She'll never be a popular boat; for one, the most OP dd for its tier is Kamikaze at tier 5, and although tier 5 is a fairly weak tier for gunboat DDs anyway, Acasta is just not equipped to excel in randoms with her toolkit. PROS: *Single-fire torps. Great for island ambushes of ships coming around a corner, strait/gap control, or torping smoke clouds when you're pretty sure a red DD is in there due to flexibility of torp spread design (can drop them all in a row or spread them out as you see fit. *Good acceleration and handling: RN DDs don't get speed boost, but they accelerate quick and hold speed in a turn. These aren't huge advantages, but they help you knife-fight other DDs and still avoid torps, and help get you out of trouble. *Decent stealth: You'll outspot Clemson and Farragut (Nicholas noses you out), outspot Gaede and Maass, and all Russian DDs. You get outspotted by IJN DDs but not by too much. And your smoke is great for breaking contact and vision control even though it sucks for offensive use. CONS: *Meh guns: the improved AP ricochet angles RN ships get doesn't seem to help much (although small sample size as I didn't play too much of her) and the low effective range (due to firing arcs), meh traverse, meh reload speed, and meh DPM mean you get your [edited]kicked by any other gunboat 1v1 assuming equally skilled players. *Situational torps: I'm used to not being able to stealthtorp; as I said, I play Clemson and Farragut often. But these torps are slowish, meh damage, and your torp range is identical to your concealment. Use them to torp smoke clouds, but don't count on racking up BB kills when they're not dumb enough to come around the corner of an island predictably enough for you to launch your torps in a line right at him. *No speed boost + low hp = low survivability: She's nimble, and her quick-reload smoke can help break contact, but if you overextend you're not going to find it easy to get back out. Her stealth is ok but she can still be outspotted by several common DDs at that tier, and she can't just boost out of trouble, so she can find herself getting focused down and her smoke is really the only thing that can buy time to bail. And once she is getting focused, she doesn't have the HP pool to last long. You've got to play smart; lone wolf deep-penetration tactics are a death wish in Acasta. *Tier 5 matchmaking: I personally enjoy the challenge of being bottom tier in most boats. However, aside from her stealth advantage over many tier 6 and 7 DDs, this is a boat that gets murdered at bottom tier. I think she'll surprise people in tier 5 ranked, but this boat is going to be terribad in randoms because she'll be bottom tier 40-50% of the time and she just doesnt have the toolkit to be effective at all. This is literally the worst t5 DD to be in a tier 7 match with. When you're uptiered, you'll jhave to work hard and play out of your mind doing all the little things to get your xp and contribute meaningfully, because you can't effectively engage anything but isolated and wounded targets and you will get pushed off caps easily. TL;DR: she fits perfectly in the niche Wargaming wanted RN DDs to fill, but in this tier, that niche just doesn't work. She's right up there with T-22 as an incredibly boring boat, and even when you find ways to win and contribute, you won't feel like you've done all that much even though you worked hard all game to do what little you did. But don't worry, Icarus is an improvement and Jervis is a strong boat, so just keep grinding. It'll be over soon. (My other reviews - British BBs: Conqueror/Lion Monarch KGV Queen Elizabeth French BBs: Overall Line Review German DDs: Flottentorpedoboot My Waifu)
  12. Hi guys! I was wondering, now that I am on a historical streak, whether to buy one of two iconic world war 2 ships and which one. The infamous Hms Hood, the ruler of the seven seas for the British navy, but sunk by the mighty Bismarck by a hit to her aft magazine, or the Scharnhorst class battleship, with those rapid firing (for a battleship, at least,) 12 inch guns. Both seemingly potent tier 7 battleships, but which one is better? what are the pros and cons? you tell me!
  13. 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
  14. With the British DD line coming out soon I'm hoping that WOWS might release a Operation that is DD oriented . the Dunkirk Operation last year was fun and all the current Op's can be tough on DD's , so how about it WOWS with all the radar ships out now how about some love for the DD's
  15. Hey everybody, I'm somewhat unfamiliar with modern warships but I'm curious about something. Given the Canadian Surface Combatant project to replace our Halifax class frigates and the decommissioned Iroquois class destroyers has just finalized the approved designs, I want to get some other opinions. The British Type 26, Dutch De Zeven Provinciën and Spanish F-105 frigates were all accepted for future review. On paper, the Dutch and Spanish offerings seem relatively reasonable, both having the capacity to provide ASW and air defense due to their fair number of VLS cells. However, the designs are relatively old. Mind you not very old however, not spring chickens. The Type 26 however worries me. It has a relatively low number of VLS cells and given it's large tonnage which worries me. I'm aware future proofing is a good thing however, the ships seem extremely empty in the capacity department compared to the other offerings. The Type 26 is the newest of the offerings but it's also untested. Given the state of British shipbuilding as of late, I'm hesitant to say the process will go smoothly, especially after crossed with Canadian shipbuilding/procurement and that mess. The submitted Type 26 variant, note the very small VLS complement compared to her size.
  16. I'm not sure if this is just a problem for me or not, but when I set the language voice over to English (Pirate) it will use the English (Unite Kingdom) voice for the F# call outs. Some of the voice lines are still the pirate voice (like the start of the battle, don't fire at your allies, etc.), but most of them are british voice overs. I use steam to play, and I have verified the game, reinstalled it, and it's persisted for the last few updates. It's not a huge deal, but it's still annoying.
  17. DonSeanvonJon

    Historical Royal Navy DDs

    As a Canadian, I'm really excited to see the RN destroyer line announced and on its way. Inevitably I'll be buying HMCS Haida of the Tribal-class when she hits the shelves as a matter of national pride, especially if she's available for Canada Day, July 1st. The ships in the line themselves are worth taking a gander at, though. Its nice to see each and every one of these warships actually existed and served, making the RN DD line one of the few line in game with none of its individual members being "paper ships". And so, without further ado, we have: Tier 2: HMS Medea (Note this image is of Medea's sister ship, HMS Melampus, originally the Greek destroyer Chios, launched in 1914.) The lead ship of her class, Medea was originally built for the Greek Navy as the Kriti, was purchased by Great Britain in 1914, and was launched in 1915. She was sold and broken up in 1921, after the First World War. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Medea Tier 3: HMS Valkyrie Bearing the pennant number (F05), she was a member of the V-class destroyer flotilla leaders, launched in 1917. She was scrapped in 1936. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Valkyrie_(1917) Tier 4: HMS Wakeful A member of the W-class, HMS Wakeful bore the pennant number (H88). She was also launched in 1917, served in the Grand Fleet, and was torpedoed and sunk on 29 May 1940 by a German E-boat during Operation Dynamo. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Wakeful_(H88) Tier 5: HMS Acasta She belonged to the interwar A-class of destroyers, launched in 1929, and bore the pennant number (H09). She fought alongside the aircraft carrier HMS Glorious and her sister, HMS Ardent against the German battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau. These vessels were sunk by the German warships on 8 June 1940, but their gallantry was noted by the German officers and crew. Additionally, the damage the battleships sustained forced them to retire to occupied Trondheim, Norway for repairs, allowing Allied convoys to safely evacuate troops from Norway. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Acasta_(H09) Tier 6: HMS Icarus HMS Icarus, one of the 9 interwar I-class destroyers, was launched in 1936, bearing the pennant number (D03). After serving in and surviving the Second World War, during which she performed numerous anti-submarine operations, convoy escorts, and ship-to-ship engagements (notably the Hunt for the Bismarck) in the Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea, she was scrapped in 1946. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Icarus_(D03) Tier 7: HMS Jervis She was the lead ship of the J-class destroyers, and bore the pennant numbers (F00) from 1938-1940 and (G00) subsequently. Jervis was launched in 1938, and bore the namesake of Admiral John Jervis, a British naval commander during the Seven Years War. HMS Jervis served honorably in WW2, earning 13 battle honors, and was eventually sold for scrap in 1954. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Jervis Tier 8: HMS Lightning An example of the L-class destroyers, Lightning was launched in 1940 and bore the pennant number (G55). Her career was short-lived, however, as she was torpedoed and sunk by German E-boat S55 on 12 March 1943. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Lightning_(G55) Tier 9: HMS Jutland HMS Jutland was the name of 2 Battle-class destroyers. The original Jutland was never completed, and the second, originally HMS Malplaquet, was renamed and launched in 1946, bearing the pennant number (D62). She served in the Royal Navy and was decommissioned, paid off, and scrapped in 1965. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Jutland_(D62) Tier 10: HMS Daring The 6th Royal Navy ship to bear the name, HMS Daring (D05) was the lead ship of her class. She was launched in 1949 and served until 1968, finally being scrapped in 1971. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Daring_(D05) And there we have it! All images are from the English Wikipedia, except for the one of HMS Jervis, found on the German wikipedia, and the photo of HMS Melampus, which I got from Naval-History.net.
  18. Ok, just wanted to consolidate a few things. The actual ships: A few characteristics: Other threads on the topic. No guarantees of the quality: The link to the Dev Blog Shoutouts for people who are scarily fast at getting these things out: @Erebthoron(x3!), @renegadestatuz, @Kizarvexis(x2!), @JediMasterDraco I will keep this thread updated, especially as more threads appear and more information is released.
  19. Name: Hood Ship type: battlecruiser Class: Admiral Nation: United Kingdom Tier: VII Greetings fellow captains, supreme overlords, and dispersion divinities. Today, in the third installment of Naval Intelligence, I bring you one of Britain's icons of World War II and the inter-war period, the premium Tier VII British battlecruiser: Hood. My objective is to inform players about a different, and factual piece of information that hopefully will aid you in deciding whether to purchase this ship or not. This review will go over its history briefly, her in-game characteristics, and other factors such as aesthetics, modules, and what you can expect if you so decide to give her a place in your port. History “History will be kind to me for I intend to write it.” - Winston Churchill The ship belonged to a class of four battlecruisers known as the Admiral-class. Hood was the sole representative to be completed once the other three members -Howe, Rodney, and Anson- were canceled. Hood 's keel was laid down on September 1st, 1916 by John Brown & Co. in Clydebank, Scotland. She was launched on August 22th, 1918, and she entered service on May 15th, 1920. For twenty years, Hood remained as the world's largest and most powerful warship in the world. Her design was the result of maximizing a battlecruiser's traits (light armor, high speed, and battleship guns) while considering the occurrences regarding the Royal Navy's battlecruisers -three months prior to Hood's construction- during the Battle of Jutland. Two of the most significant adjustments made to the design, thanks to the loss of 3 battlecruisers at Jutland, was the increase in thickness of the main armor belt to 305 mm (12 in), and the internal armor plating that protected the forward magazines. This addition in weight plagued Hood with a lower freeboard, which attained her several nicknames such as: "Largest Submarine in the Fleet", "HMS Wobbly", and "The Seven B's" ("Britain's Biggest Bull*****ingest B***ard Built By Brown"). Throughout the inter-war period, Hood saw extensive service as the flagship of the Battlecruiser Squadron of the Atlantic Fleet and became the Royal Navy's poster boy (or girl, depending on personal perspective) due to her size, media coverage, and inter-war actions. She took part in a worldwide cruise which lasted from late 1923 to 1925, the purpose of the cruise was to project British naval power and influence to other countries and colonies (something that came to be known as "gunboat diplomacy"). Throughout her service, the ship became the pride of Britain and the Royal Navy, being appropriately referred to colloquially as "The Mighty Hood". After the cruise ended, she was refitted from 1929 to 1931 and continued to go on cruises, training, and minor refits. Through the 1930's, Hood's dire need of a major refit and modernization became apparent (such as her power plant's diminishing performance and the crew's inability to wash and bathe due to the fresh water evaporators being redirected to the boilers). She was scheduled to enter drydock in 1941 for a significant refit; however, the outbreak of World War II altered her fate in history. In 1940, Hood became the flagship of Force H and participated in the destruction of the French fleet that was docked at Mers-el-Kébir, French Algeria (present day: Algeria). She scored four 15" shell hits on the French battleship Dunkerque and was straddled in return by the same ship. Once the operation ended, Hood returned to Scapa Flow where she was replaced by Renown as the flagship of Force H. She participated in a couple of sorties without much success afterward. In honesty, Hood's recognition and popularity stem from the wrong reasons. During the Battle of the Denmark Strait, Hood, alongside the much newer battleship HMS Prince of Wales, was ordered to intercept the German battleship Bismarck and the heavy cruiser Prinz Eugen. Hood's participation in the engagement was brief, after one of Bismarck's 15" shells struck the leading battlecruiser and provoked a series of events which can, in majority, only be speculated upon; however, most theories converge on the idea of the German shell hitting Hood's after magazines and producing a jet of fire that erupted near the mainmast of the ship. The subsequent blast resulted in a fatal explosion that claimed Hood herself and most of her crew. Only three crewmen survived. Specifications “Technology is neither good nor bad; nor is it neutral” - Melvin Kranzberg Hood was powered by 24 Yarrow oil-fired boilers and 4 Brown-Curtis turbines. Her power output was rated at 144,000 shaft horsepower and produced a speed of 32 knots at the time of her commission; however, the lack of a major refit and meticulous repairs decreased her speed to 29 knots. She was armed with eight 381 mm (15")/42 BL Mk I rifles that were capable of firing a shell every 30 seconds. Her secondary armament comprised of fourteen 102 mm (4.01") QF Mk XVI dual-purpose guns on seven dual mounts (in-game their range as a secondary armament and an anti-aircraft gun is 5 kilometers, with an average damage of 65.8). The anti-aircraft suite on Hood was additionaly composed of twenty-four 40 mm QF 2pdr -also known as "Pom-Poms"- that were mounted on three sets of eight barrels (in-game range and average damage: 2.49 km, and 59.4); for close range she possessed four quadruple 12.7 mm Vickers Mk III machine guns (range/damage: 1.2 km/8.4), and finally she had the experimental UP AA Rocket Launcher Mark I -this particular armament was deemed inefficient and potentially dangerous by the Royal Navy- it never shot down any aircraft but in-game they possess a range of 1.5 kilometers and an average damage of 50 (though their historical range is 305 meters/1,000 feet). In the tradition of World War I warship design, Hood was also equipped with six 533 mm (21") torpedo tubes that were fixed in the hull. Four of the tubes, two on each side, were mounted above the waterline and remained onboard the ship until her demise in 1941. Meanwhile, the remaining two torpedo tubes were submerged and located near the "A" turret, but they were removed in 1937. Hood's essence is that of a battlecruiser, and her armor scheme reflects this. Her main armor belt is 305 mm (12") thick and is mostly underwater while being covered by her torpedo bulges which provide most of the ship with a torpedo damage reduction of 18%. Above the main belt, Hood's thinner armor belts can be found: the one directly on top of the main belt has a thickness of 178 mm and is relatively small when it is compared to her 127 mm (5") belt that ends at the weather deck. Internally, Hood's armor is also reminiscent of a World War I capital ship. Her citadel has a turtle back armor scheme which increases the protection of her vital parts at close range -though not as effectively as her German counterparts- and reduces her armor's effectiveness at long range due to plunging fire. Hood's citadel armored deck slopes have a raw thickness of 51 mm and are sloped inward. The battlecruiser's deck protection is also inherited from World War I designs. Her deck armor thickness is distributed among two decks in-game: the weather deck near the bow and the stern share a thickness of 25 mm, while the midships section has 51 mm. Her citadel's deck armor can be sectioned in two parts: machinery and magazines. The machinery spaces such as the engine rooms are protected by 38 mm near the centerline, and 51 mm on the sides; while the magazines of the main battery turrets are shielded by 76 mm of armor -with small portions near the ends of the front and after sections being protected by 108 mm and 127 mm respectively. In all, Hood's armor scheme is sufficient to make angling possible and shield the ship from cruiser-like armaments, but it gives out easily against high-caliber guns when showing a poorly angled broadside to enemy battleships. Her bow and stern are covered by 25 mm of plating; however, small 127 mm and 152 mm plates can be found next to the main belts (these can be used to bounce enemy shells through angling, but the Hood's captain should not actively look for close range engagements against capital ships of any kind. Playstyle “Adapt what is useful, reject what is useless, and add what is specifically your own.” - Bruce Lee Hood's style resembles that of Kongo's. To players of the Japanese battleship line, this comes to no surprise, as both vessels were designed as battlecruisers; ships equipped with battleship guns, relatively light armor, and a powerful array of boilers and turbines to give them a speed advantage over contemporary battleships. One must make the most of the battlecruiser's armament of eight 15" guns and their armor-piercing (AP) shells which have a short arm time, a maximum damage of 11,400 points, and a slow shell velocity of 731.5 meters per second which is shared with the guns' high-explosive (HE) shells. Hood's HE shells are respectable; possessing a 34% fire chance, a maximum damage of 5,300 points. Unlike most battleships of the Royal Navy, these HE shells are not subject to the 1/4 HE penetration rule. The lack of this rule provides Hood's 381 mm HE shells with a standard penetration value of 63 mm. Further, the battlecruiser's speed must be used wisely in maneuvers and fleet operations; such as a push or taking a defensive position. Her turning circle of 910 meters, accompanied by a rudder shift of 13.4 seconds and large dimensions make her commander think ahead of their maneuvers, and opt for open waters which allow the usage of Hood's speed and rudder shift. Related to the previous paragraph, the spotting of opportunities and potential flanks alongside friendly cruisers must be prioritized. Her short-fuzed AP shells make her an effective counter to enemy cruisers and lightly armored battleships; however, the shells' short fuze is also one of her weaknesses since they are unreliable at penetrating main armor belts at any range (most times they will shatter or bounce). The correct shell usage and proper aiming are necessary to obtain high damage games with the Hood. Her AA suite on its own is not impressive, but Hood has access to a unique Defensive AA Fire consumable that multiplies her UP Rocket's average damage by x25. But more on this consumable on the following section. Consumables “The more you leave out, the more you highlight what you leave in.” - Henry Green Hood comes equipped with standard British Damage Control Party and Repair Party consumables. The Repair Party is similar to those found on equal, and lower tier Royal Navy battleships. Additionally, Hood has access to a special Defensive Fire AA consumable that multiplies her short range aura -comprised of her rocket launchers- by 25 times for 60 seconds. This translates to an impressive 1,250 average damage while using stock values, and it can be enhanced by Advanced Firing Training, Basic Firing Training, AA Guns Modification 2 Upgrade, and the November Echo Setteseven signal flag. Aesthetics “Design can be art. Design can be aesthetics. Design is so simple, that's why it is so complicated.” - Paul Rand Her sleek, long, and lean hull make her a sight to behold. The superstructure is an interesting blend between World War I and inter-war designs. The funnels of Hood also project this peculiar idea that she possesses a massive power plant and can stretch her legs when she's needed to do so (that is if ships have legs... but that is a topic for another day or a more laid back discussion). Conclusion “Any fool can know. The point is to understand.” - Albert Einstein Personally, I quite enjoy her, especially considering her historical significance and the recognition from the H.M.S. Hood Association that this premium ship has. She is a formidable team member when used correctly, not as a brawler, but as a flanker and an opportunist that can hit hard and fight hard. Her presence in a match also allows for some light-hearted banter to take place between the teams at the start of a battle. And what better way to honor the real HMS Hood by making conscience about her through playing her in-game and getting to know her story and rise as a naval legend. "Ad Astra Per Aspera" Phantom out. References Allen, F., Bevand, P., & Charpentier Ltd. (2014). H.M.S. Hood Association-Battle Cruiser Hood - Ship Specifications and Armament: H.M.S. Hood - Notes for Visitors. Retrieved from http://www.hmshood.com/ship/pamphlet30s.htm Allen, F., Bevand, P., & H.M.S. Hood Association. (2014). H.M.S. Hood Association-Battle Cruiser Hood - Ship Specifications and Armament: Hood Factoids. Retrieved from http://www.hmshood.com/ship/hoodspecs7.htm Wargaming.net. (2018). Hood. Retrieved from http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Hood Wikipedia. (2018). HMS Hood. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Hood Wikipedia. (2018). Attack on Mers-el-Kébir. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Mers-el-Kébir Quotes recovered from Goodreads, website: https://www.goodreads.com/quotes In-game images and icons recovered from the Wargaming Wiki, all credit goes to their respective authors. Other images recovered from Google Images. Due to my circumstance, I must make do with electronic sources and screenshots from other players or the wiki itself.
×