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

KGV Battleship in tree...

236 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,085
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
4,720 posts

Given what we saw with Scharnhorst/Gneisenau... is anybody else thinking WG is going to use a 15" or 16" KGV variant as the tech-tree ship, with PoW as a premium version in the historical configuration?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,887
[NSF]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,304 posts
9,284 battles

KGV will probably just be another lackluster tier 8 with its frankly bad 14" guns, middling armor, sub par secondaries and mediocre AA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,894
[HINON]
[HINON]
Wiki Lead, Beta Testers, Privateers
6,801 posts
5,248 battles

KGV will probably just be another lackluster tier 8 with its frankly bad 14" guns, middling armor, sub par secondaries and mediocre AA.

 

You're joking right? She has more belt armor than Scharnhorst, which has more armor on the belt than Bismarck and one of the reasons people have a problem putting her any lower than T8; her 14" guns where considered one of the most successful battleship main armaments of WWII; and the secondaries are bigger than those on the USN BB's (Though not the KM BB's) and I haven't seen anything to say that the performance was anything but satisfactory.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,799
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
6,085 battles

KGV will probably just be another lackluster tier 8 with its frankly bad 14" guns, middling armor, sub par secondaries and mediocre AA.

 

Bro, are you kidding? KGV has a 370mm armor Belt. That's more than just about any other BB save the tier 10s. And she'll be at tier 8. Middling armor? And you're talking about the ship KGV that beat Scharnhorst to death. And did some decent damage to Tirpitz.

 

Middling tier 8? Hardly.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
422
[F-N-B]
Beta Testers
1,411 posts
8,485 battles

KGV will probably just be another lackluster tier 8 with its frankly bad 14" guns, middling armor, sub par secondaries and mediocre AA.

 

Your lack of knowledge is showing there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51
[JASH]
Members
189 posts
5,913 battles

KGV will probably just be another lackluster tier 8 with its frankly bad 14" guns, middling armor, sub par secondaries and mediocre AA.

 

You just went full [edited], you NEVER go full [edited]...
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
74 posts
25 battles

took me a minute to realize what the hell KGV was lol. But anyway,with that said maybe the 14" guns WERE a successful armament in REAL life ,however i think we can all agree they're pretty damn bad here in the game , and to put them on a tier 8 oh jeez oh man . I mean shi* BISMARCK and TIRPITZ with 15" guns are at a disadvantage by that point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,799
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
6,085 battles

took me a minute to realize what the hell KGV was lol. But anyway,with that said maybe the 14" guns WERE a successful armament in REAL life ,however i think we can all agree they're pretty damn bad here in the game , and to put them on a tier 8 oh jeez oh man . I mean shi* BISMARCK and TIRPITZ with 15" guns are at a disadvantage by that point

 

The damage that Bismarck and Tirpitz crank out in comparison to other tier 8s say otherwise.
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
74 posts
25 battles

 

The damage that Bismarck and Tirpitz crank out in comparison to other tier 8s say otherwise.

 

successful secondaries,1 gets everyones favorite......torpedoes and a faster rate of fire,throw enough shi*t at the wall and some of its bound to stick what im sayin here is that i'd be willing to bet that a majority of their dmg is coming from the secondaries and torpedoes
Edited by kyle26_2016

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,799
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
6,085 battles

 

successful secondaries,1 gets everyones favorite......torpedoes and a faster rate of fire,throw enough shi*t at the wall and some of its bound to stick

 

I just got 108k Dmg last match in my Tirpitz. and 6 citadels. I beg to differ. 2 of those Citadels was on a NC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
74 posts
25 battles

 

I just got 108k Dmg last match in my Tirpitz. and 6 citadels. I beg to differ. 2 of those Citadels was on a NC.

 

GG but lets be fair here......you can citadel NC in cruisers  not tryin 2 diminish it ,im just sayin
Edited by kyle26_2016

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,799
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
6,085 battles

 

GG but lets be fair here......you can citadel NC in cruisers  not tryin 2 diminish it ,im just sayin

 

Only situation that the German 15s are outmatched are bow on, otherwise those guns are accurate, hit very hard and have amazing range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
385 posts
2,475 battles

The King George V-class ships are very well protected with belt armor thickness second only to Yamato. While the belt doesn't have inclination, the sheer thickness of the plates along with the excellent quality of British cemented armor gave it excellent vertical protection. The horizontal deck protection is on par with the Iowa-class, with comparable weather and main armored deck thicknesses. The TDS is supposed to be quite good as well, with higher theoretical TNT proof rating than Yamato (though I believe it accomplished this by considering the outboard auxiliary machinery spaces as "sacrificial"). The subsequent Lion-class battleships have identical armor arrangement.

 

The real question regarding its in-game durability is the citadel height placement. If the citadel hitbox volume is placed below the waterline, then it should fare quite well in the survivability department.

Edited by icyplanetnhc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,367
[HINON]
[HINON]
Beta Testers
5,913 posts
5,645 battles

The only thing a 14 ouch gun really loses is over match potential. Scharnhorst is legendary for being useless against BBs but in my last Scharnhorst match I did 105k damage and 88k was to BBs. 

 

KGV belongs at t8. No question about it. She'd be OPAF any lower. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,168
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
9,312 posts
18,902 battles

This one again, I'm not sure which is more contentious KGV T7-T8 or Alaska's classification...

 

The 14in's would be bad in-game, it'd be the only T8 BB unable to overmatch the bows of T6 and T6 battleships. Penetration would be very poor. Turret traverse is also bad at 2'/sec, in comparison to Amagi 4.3'/s, N. Carolina 4'/s, Bis/Tirp at 5'/s.

 

Not a fun experience based on my time in Warspite.

 

However the rest of the hull is pretty good. Thick armor, ok speed, good AA, secondaries may at least be better than the USN (could have same ROF but heavier shells, still firing HE).

 

 

The fact that the T6 and T8 KM DD get 128 or 150mm gun options gives me hope that maybe we'll get both options on a KGV.

 

The only thing a 14 ouch gun really loses is over match potential. Scharnhorst is legendary for being useless against BBs but in my last Scharnhorst match I did 105k damage and 88k was to BBs. 

Scharnhorst gets great turret traverse and 3 RPM vs. best case about 2-2.2 RPM on KGV (and no real historic reason to give it better than 30s). Plus Scharn gets nice high MV at about 900m/s. KGV's 14in guns (unless supercharged) are a paltry 757 m/s - about the same as archy-shells Warspite, but with a lighter shell.

 

Loses overmatch (which is a big deal, one of your key being top-tier advantages), has long flight times (bad) and as it should be compared to 15in/16in guns bad penetration at a tier where things like Bismarck abound.

 

Edited by mofton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,799
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
6,085 battles

The King George V-class ships are very well protected with belt armor thickness second only to Yamato, Grober, Montana. While the belt doesn't have inclination, the sheer thickness of the plates along with the excellent quality of British cemented armor gave it excellent vertical protection. The horizontal deck protection is on par with the Iowa-class, with comparable weather and main armored deck thicknesses. The TDS is supposed to be quite good as well, with higher theoretical TNT proof rating than Yamato (though I believe it accomplished this by considering the outboard auxiliary machinery spaces as "sacrificial"). The subsequent Lion-class battleships have identical armor arrangement.

FTFY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,791
[HINON]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
8,856 posts
3,680 battles

 

Bro, are you kidding? KGV has a 370mm armor Belt. That's more than just about any other BB save the tier 10s. And she'll be at tier 8. Middling armor? And you're talking about the ship KGV that beat Scharnhorst to death. And did some decent damage to Tirpitz.

 

Middling tier 8? Hardly.

 

When did a KGV class battleship ever do damage to the Tirpitz?
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,887
[NSF]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,304 posts
9,284 battles

Looks like some people are upset.

 

Vertical armor thickness counts for [edited]all in this game, and you know that. Whats more, the internal armor scheme is nonexistent according to how WG treats citadel spaces, which means its going to have an Iowa tier citadel, so good luck with that. Your extra 2 inches of belt armor aren't going to save you from tier 8-9-10 15/16/18" guns. The turret faces are also thin and completely flat, enjoy losing your guns. The Germans will still be just as impossible to citadel as they are now thanks to the turtle deck.

 

You're also looking at a citadel space like this:

 

KoJctiY.png

 

On top of that, the maneuverability of the KGV's wasn't that great (reportedly took TWICE the distance to make a turn that an NC did). Your guns won't be able to overmatch any battleship you can see, even some high tier cruisers will be immune. Nor are they particularly high velocity or quick reloading. Long range AA is going to be average at best, medium range AA will be between USN and Germany, and short range will be dependent on which ship they use as reference. Secondaries will also be poor. TDS rating is seemingly completely random, so placing your hopes and dreams on it is foolish.

 

 

Forgive me if I'm not particularly enthused.

 

 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,799
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
6,085 battles

 

When did a KGV class battleship ever do damage to the Tirpitz?

 

Sorry misread, KGV was part of Operation Tungsten, I thought it said she engaged the Tirpitz, but she didn't my mistake.  Late night, tired reading.

Share this post


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

Most likely, if WG isn't going to backtrack on their statements they made to justify Scharn and Gneis, KGV w/ 14" is likely to be a T8 Premium, regardless of whether or not it has supercharger shells.

 

Line KGV is more likely to be the 9x 15" variant, with the 15" Mark IIs.  Someone did the math; the AP shells on those would be rivaling the damage curve of 16" shells at that tier, superior to that of KM AP.  However, the HE shells would still be the same one as used by the 15" Marks Is (which is in-game as the type used by Warspite).  However, the design benefits from being a paper cannon design, so it can start out with idealistic performance rather than realistic performance.

 

However, despite having the more powerful 15" Mark IIs, KGV, and much of the RN line in general, are likely to be subjected to their poor traverse, meaning 72s (which is actually buffed over their historical traverse).  This is likely to leave them as a second line of stand-off battleships whose ideal fighting ranges are 14km or greater, like the IJN line, rather than another brawler line like the KM.  Then there's poor Tactical Diameter; KGV would already be rivaling FdG with a 900m TD (given WG's inflation of battleship TD for "balance").  Vanguard wouldn't be much better (she had roughly 900m TD as well).

 

Accuracy would probably rival IJN accuracy but have KM reload rates to offset their inability to disengage and re-engage right away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
611
[SYN]
Members
2,861 posts
10,456 battles

 

The damage that Bismarck and Tirpitz crank out in comparison to other tier 8s say otherwise.

 

Tirpitz and Bismarck can still over match the bows of T8+ cruisers. the KGV's will be unable to do this.
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,799
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
6,085 battles

 

Tirpitz and Bismarck can still over match the bows of T8+ cruisers. the KGV's will be unable to do this.

 

Yeah, but Tirpitz and Bismarck won't be able to overmatch KGV at ALL. And good luck penning it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,887
[NSF]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,304 posts
9,284 battles

 

Yeah, but Tirpitz and Bismarck won't be able to overmatch KGV at ALL. And good luck penning it.

 

An extra 2 inches of belt armor is not going to save you if you get caught broadside against something with the average tier 8 and up gun, only the Germans can avoid taking 50k devastating strikes in that environment.

 

All they have to do against a bow on KGV is sit there and let it burn from secondaries while shooting something else. 

 

Just like how you deal with bow on NC's, except this one has even less potential to damage you back..

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,168
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
9,312 posts
18,902 battles

Vertical armor thickness counts for [edited]all in this game, and you know that. Whats more, the internal armor scheme is nonexistent according to how WG treats citadel spaces, which means its going to have an Iowa tier citadel, so good luck with that. Your extra 2 inches of belt armor aren't going to save you from tier 8-9-10 15/16/18" guns. The turret faces are also thin and completely flat, enjoy losing your guns. The Germans will still be just as impossible to citadel as they are now thanks to the turtle deck.

 

Armor - Vertical armor thickness does seem to count for something - perhaps not everything (Amagi gets by very well with what, 250mm of belt?). However there is a noteworthy difference in how tanky North Carolina (300mm) feels compared to Colorado (343mm). That's admittedly not just the 15% armor loss, but the difference in seeing 14in's from a tier down and 16in's from a tier down. There's also the all-or-nothing scheme which should mean she takes fewer '33's and looking at your image the main belt goes up pretty high. She doesn't have much of the thinner upper belt seen on IJN/KM BB's to aim for. That doesn't just keep you safe® from BB shells but may well also help against incoming cruiser-caliber gunfire. Turret face isn't all that bad at 330mm, Bismarck's only 360mm.

 

TDS - You say that TDS may not be great, and I completely agree - apparently the metric is torpedo bulge thickness which I don't know about.

 

Handling - As with TDS efficacy WG don't seem to care much about historic turning circles (see Yamato, Iowa in particular I've seen complained about). Warspite gets her legacy crazy turning circle, maybe a British trait despite history - the cruisers don't slow in turns after all.

 

Turrets - thin, but low profile. I don't tend to lose too many, in 70 odd games I don't remember losing one in Dunkerque for instance, which is supposedly an issue.

 

Long range AA - 16x 5.25in vs. 20x 5in on the USN BB doesn't seem a terrible starting place. ROF in the AA role was lower, shell thrown was heavier. Not a successful weapon historically (though PoW did ok against high alt bombers) but in-game who's to say?

 

Close range AA - late war, pretty much anything goes. Close range matters less than long range, and WG showed with RN CL that they'd shove on whatever they wanted frankenstein refit. A decent spread of Bofors, Oerlikon's and 2-lbers.

 

Secondaries - USN get their ROF nerfed down to 12, the 5.25's could do 12 plus throwing a bigger, faster shell. Longer range.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×