Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
admiral_noone

[POLL] Which Tier 10 BB looks better?

Sexier-looking TX BB?  

274 members have voted

  1. 1. Which Tier X Battleship do you think looks more beautiful?

    • Yamato
      111
    • Montana
      98
    • GK
      56

62 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

306
[UDEAD]
Beta Testers
994 posts
12,711 battles

Maybe because they were never built, but for me the Montana and GK have an odd "uncanny valley" feel to them. 

Edited by NCC81701

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
6,621 posts
8,658 battles

Voted for Yamato, though I'm not really fond of any of the T10 BBs aesthetically.

 

You want a beautiful looking BB, then my vote would be for WG's idea of how Amagi would have looked if she'd been modernized in to a fast BB, like the Kongo's, rather than an aircraft carrier like she was historically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
273
[AAYC]
Beta Testers
791 posts
18,755 battles

For me Germans designed things to look smexy and be lethal.  Sure T10, for the Germans, is a fantasy but if you look to the ships that were built IMHO the those ships have character.  Don't get me wrong, the Yamato is cool looking too just my opinion that German ships look more interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
110
[HIT]
Beta Testers
492 posts
6,964 battles

wait ... wait...  "looks" better? are you asking which ship looks (cosmetic) or looks (performance) better?

 

loaded question..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,471
[SWFSH]
[SWFSH]
Volunteer Moderator
2,629 posts
7,415 battles

Aesthetically, I've got to give it to the GK. The bow, stern, proportions, turrets, superstructure, AA guns, secondary battery... They're all very aesthetically pleasing and very crisp-cut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
312 posts
2,789 battles

wait ... wait...  "looks" better? are you asking which ship looks (cosmetic) or looks (performance) better?

 

loaded question..

 

Cosmetics question

 

cosmetic = aesthetic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,080
Alpha Tester
6,683 posts
3,338 battles

Though I'll most likely be getting the Montana first out of the three (even though that's still a LONG ways off), I'd go with the GK because it's immune to citadels, and practicality is the most beautiful trait of all in any war machine. 

Edited by 1Sherman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,662
[CALM]
Beta Testers
6,838 posts
6,088 battles

1. Yamato - Built and exudes power with the sheer number of AA and secondaries she has, as well as a unique solid pagoda mast.  Also has a superstructure with tiered defensive emplacements, giving off that fortress feel, and an angled funnel that gives an illusion of having some speed as well.  Her compactness also amplifies the look, with how tightly clustered the weaponry are and just giving off that feeling of bristling like a porcupine.

 

2. Kurfurst - Has that fortress-like aesthetic going with her superstructure and weaponry (castles, the Reichbunker, and flak towers).  My only complaint is the lack of more secondaries around Turrets 2 and 3 and how relatively clean her front and aft deck are (not even a few extra short-range AA mounts along Turret 1's "barricade" or near Turret 4).  Also unusual catapult location; I'm still wondering how the heck a plane can even be stored and launched from it.

 

3. Montana - "How minimalistic can we go?"  Overall the most disappointing.  It just doesn't exude that feeling of might or strength beyond an impressive 12 cannons in her own right.  But the turret designs are minimalistic, the superstructure as compact as possible, and the relatively bulky secondary assemblies kind of ruin the look.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,216 posts
951 battles

Not even a question for me: Yamato - love everything about it, really, from it's somewhat-stubby hullform, to the armored citadel ringed fortress-like by AA and secondary batteries, to the aircraft facilities at the stern, to the downslope of the foc'sle that actually places A turret a deck below B/C. Marvelous looking ship. 

Edited by Cruiser_Maya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
49 posts
1,828 battles

Yamato is ugly AF so she's out immediately.

 

Main turrets, GK. Secondary/AA Montana. Superstructure GK (though I like Montana's bridge better). Hull shape Montana (GK is too wide and it makes her guns look small).

 

Overall I'd say Montana as a slim preference over GK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
291 posts
3,952 battles

Montana is ugly and GK is even worse....

 

 

 

 

Yammy won't be beaten by 2 fake ships

Edited by Destroyer8172

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,086
[NDA]
Supertester, Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
5,754 posts
4,574 battles

Yamato. Forever and always.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
706
[SOV]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,873 posts
11,923 battles

Montana, the secondary mounts on the Yamato just look... stupid. Too round. Bleah.

 

Also, agree with the warts comment above.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×