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

[Speculation] How gun performance will affect Royal Navy Battleships

86 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

209
[TSWAA]
Members
317 posts
6,813 battles

 

 

Last Monday, I posted about the performance of the Royal Navy's 381mm guns. My conclusions were:

 

  • The modified Mark 1 turrets and Mark II turrets with 30 degrees elevation would be acceptable Tier 8 guns and good Tier 7 guns
  • An unhistorical modified Mark 1 turrets and Mark II turrets with supercharges in the guns would be a good Tier 8 gun. 

 

At the time, I didn't have penetration values for the supercharged guns, but with some help from Fr05ty and some of the other members of the ShipComrade.com staff, I have some additional data to share.

 

Therefore, today we will discuss Royal navy guns 343mm and larger.

 

Fr05ty has reverse engineered the damage formula for shells in World of Warships with a reasonable degree of accuracy. The formula is dependent on the mass of the shell and the muzzle velocity. The formula is:

 

Damage = 21.088*(Mass x Muzzle Velocity)^0.4695

 

Additionally, the US Navy's Armor Penetration formula give us an empirical armor penetration at 0 yards via the formula:

 

Penetration @ 0 yards (mm) = (0.5561613 * Muzzle Velocity^1.1 * Shell mass^0.55) / Caliber^0.65

 

With these formulae, we can estimate the damage and penetration for the various guns of the Royal Navy. Bear in mind that these numbers have been rounded to better reflect in game damage values.

 

Exhibit 1:

Ship Gun Name Shell Mass (kg) Muzzle Velocity (m/s) Damage Penetration @ 0 yards (mm)
Lion 343mm/45 Mark V(L) 567 787 9400 627.1
Tiger 343mm/45 Mark V(H) 639.6 759 9800 643.8
King George V 356mm/45 Mark 7 721 757 10400 669.3
Warspite 381mm/42 Mark I 879 732 11400 688.3
Vanguard 381mm/42 Mark I 879 785 11600 743.3
King George V (theoretical) 381mm/45 Mark II 879 836 11900 796.6
Nelson 406mm/45 Mark 1 929 797 12000 747.6
Lion 406mm/45 Mark 3 1080 747 12500 756.3
Yamato 460mm/45 Type94 1460 780 14800 863.2
Grosser Kurfurst 420mm L/48 Drh LC/40 1220 800 13500 853.1
Montana 406mm/50 Mk7 1225 762 13500 828.5

Exhibit 1 shows the properties of known Royal Navy guns in comparison with the in-game statistics of Tier 10 battleship guns (penetration values are based on the USN Empirical formula). A couple of caveats here. Penetration values are at 0 meters or what the penetration would be if the shell were to impact armor immediately on leaving the end of the gun tube. This is impossible in a real life scenario, but represents the mathematical maximum penetration for a given shell and gun. Penetration values at range is vastly more complicated, as the ballistic trajectory, angle of impact, shell velocity degradation, and other factors play a significant role in determining penetration. That said, a heavier, faster shell will maintain its penetration capability better than a slower, lighter shell.

 

So how do Royal Navy guns stack up against the guns currently in game?

 

Exhibit 2

jsaXMxl.jpg

 

 

Exhibit 2 contains a fair amount of data.

 

  • The Purple circles in the lower left are in-game 12 inch (305mm) guns with the worst performing gun being the 305mm/40 41st Year Type guns on the Mikasa.
  • The Orange diamonds are the 14 inch (356mm) guns, with the 356mm/45 41st Year Type guns from the Myogi being the worst and the 356mm/50 Mk7 guns from the New Mexico being the best performing. 
  • The Blue triangles are the 15 inch (381mm) guns with the Bismarck being arguably the best of the lot. The unmarked value is for the Bayern.
  • The Red circles are the 16 inch (406mm) guns, ranging from the 406mm L/52 Drh LC/34 guns on the GK and FdG to the 410mm/50 10th Year Type guns on the Izumo and the 406mm/50 Mk7 guns on the Montana and Iowa. 
  • The 420mm L/48 Drh LC/40 guns from the GK and FdG as well as the 460mm/45 Type94 guns from the Yamato are labeled specifically. 
  • The Green squares are the Royal Navy guns of 343mm and higher.

 

So what does this chart tell us?

 

First of all, a couple of assumptions. This analysis is purely based on the viability of gun performance for a ship to be slotted at a certain tier. Other factors, such as speed, AA rating, armor may have an effect on the final placement in the tech tree.

 

Tiers 3 through 5

I think its reasonable to assume that the Tier 3 through 5 ships will be the Dreadnaught, Colossus, and Iron Duke class ships. While there are some options for alternatives, particularly at Tier 4 and 5, it almost doesn't matter. The Royal Navy ships at this tier are easily equivalent to the current ships in game. Dreadnaught's 12 inch guns will be on par with the Kawachi and South Carolina's guns. The 13.5 inch guns are slightly inferior to the 14 inch guns currently in game on the Japanese Tier 4 and 5, as well as the USN Tier V, but not dramatically so. This may be compensated for with a slightly higher rate of fire, perhaps a 28 second reload or something along that line.

 

Tier 6

Tier 6 already has an excellent Royal Navy battleship as a premium in the Warspite. In reality, Wargaming has two options at Tier 6, the Queen Elizabeth and Revenge-class Superdreadnaughts would fall into place easily here. While it may seem easiest to slap the Queen Elizabeth class ships (of which Warspite is one) the Revenge class ships show an interesting opportunity. As I showed last week with the help of LittleWhiteMouse, the Warspite fires normal charged guns out of Mark 1 turrets which only elevate to 15 degrees (as opposed to the 30 degrees the modified Mark 1 turrets she possesses were capable of). The Revenge class ships were considered inferior to the QE's and were not upgraded as heavily. As such, they mostly did not receive the modified Mark 1 turrets. In compensation, they were given the "Supercharges". These increased the muzzle velocity from 732 m/s to 785 m/s. A Revenge at Tier 6 with supercharges would be a nightmare to deal with. By far the most powerful guns of the Tier, range comparable or slightly higher than the Warspite, and good armor. The downside is that she would be incredibly vulnerable to air attack. This would make her playstyle similar to that of the Arizona. 
 

That said, I expect the Queen Elizabeth class to be the Tier 6 ship of the line. It would offer historical basis for upgraded hulls and upgraded guns and range. Without the supercharges and with a slightly greater range than the in-game Warspite which would track with other Premium versions of line ships. (See the Prinz Eugen)


Tier 7

This is where things become problematic for the Royal Navy battleship line. There are several ships that would fit into Tier 7. 

 

HMS Hood, pride of the Royal Navy, could be an interesting fit here. With 381mm guns with Mark II turrets, her range could be in excess of 20km, combined with a high speed would let her kite and dictate engagement ranges. The downside is that without supercharges in her guns, the only advantage she has over the Warspite's guns is that range. With the low muzzle velocity, the Hood would have difficulty penetrating targets at long ranges unless she was almost exclusively going for deck hits. 

 

The King George V  class ships would also fit at this tier, provided they have the historical 14 inch guns. As shown in Exhibit 2, the 14 inch (356mm) guns of the KGV are quite average in comparison to the guns found in Tier 4 through 6. With a top speed of 28.3 knots, she's reasonably fast, the equivalent of the North Carolina class, but doesn't match the speed of Scharnhorst and Bismarck, let alone Gniesenau. She could probably eat the Nagato and Colorado for breakfast though, as both of these ships are vulnerable to 14 inch shells if they show broadside. Yet, KGV's broadside is only 10 guns, compared to the 12 found on the Tier 6 American ships with equivalent guns. While the Scharnhorst has long proven that she can compete as a cruiser killer at Tier 7, the 14 inch KGV would struggle without the speed and torpedoes of her German rival. No matter where you put it, the 14 inch KGV just does not fit well in the game.

 

The final option for Tier 7 would be the Nelson class, with her battery of nine 16 inch (406mm) guns. As shown in Exhibit 2, the Nelson's 406mm guns are inferior to every other 406mm gun in the game in terms of damage and penetration. That said, her guns aren't that far behind those of the Tier 7 Nagato and Colorado. Her speed is low, at 23 knots, being slightly slower than the Nagato and faster than Colorado. Yet her main battery all faces forward, giving her a nasty "bow in" playstyle that could be very difficult for even the Scharnhorst and Gniesenau to deal withThat said, her speed would be her major weakness, yet not a crippling one.

 

Tier 8

This is another problem Tier for the Royal Navy. There are several options to discuss:

 

The Nelson at Tier 7 might be too overpowered, with a playstyle that would make her difficult to kill and very powerful. Yet her speed, which at Tier 7 would be workable, completely falls apart at Tier 8. 23 knots when she has a tier bracket capable of seeing Kurfursts, Montanas, and Yamato's turns her weakness into a deathtrap. Placing her here would make Tier 8 a nightmare roadblock in the tree.

 

Alternatively, the King George V, which had so many problems at Tier 7, would fit in well here at Tier 8 with one caveat. She would have to have the proposed 15 inch (381mm) guns. This alternative design would see KGV have nine 15 inch guns in triple turrets, similar to the North Carolina, South Dakota, and Iowa in configuration but with smaller guns. As shown in Exhibit 2, the 381mm guns proposed for the KGV are massively superior to the guns on the Hood and Warspite. They're even superior to the guns found on her German rivals Bismarck and Tirpitz. The KGV with 15 inch guns could easily step into the Tier 8 role. Even if these guns are an upgrade from the 14 inch guns in the module tree, the ship would remain a workable Tier 8.

 

The final option and possible premium Tier 8, would be the HMS Vanguard. The last serving Royal Navy battleship, the Vanguard was built on the cheap, literally with spare guns laying around from when battlecruisers were converted into Aircraft Carriers. As mentioned in my article last week, Vanguard, outfitted with modified Mark I turrets and supercharges, could be a workable Tier 8, with her high speed and impressive AA weaponry. I struggle to see her in the tech tree, as she doesn't seem like a logical step from any ship to any other ship, and therefore expect to see her as a premium if we see her at all.

 

Tier 9

Finally, a tier that doesn't have a problem for the Royal Navy to fill. The planned Lion class battleships were to carry nine 16 inch (406mm) guns in triple turrets. These guns were improvements on the 16 inch guns on the Nelson, but did not match the capability of the 406mm Mark 7 guns installed on the Iowa and planned for the Montana. Yet its easy to overlook that and place her here, as a Tier 9. Her capabilities closely match that of the USN's North Carolina class in terms of speed and firepower, yet her armor scheme is substantially better than Iowa. She should be a comfortable fit for USN battleship players.

 

Tier 10

Here is where we come to the biggest problem of all for the Royal Navy Battleship line. In all honesty, I think this is the reason we have yet to see this line in game. There is no reasonable ship to place in this tier. 

 

Consider: The IJN actually built the Yamato class ships. Whatever their supposed faults, they were an impressive feat of engineering. The USN had complete plans for Montana before they were put on hold and eventually canceled. There are extensive records of these ships in the archives. The Kriegsmarine was pressed to come up with fantastical ships no one had ever considered building by their leader, but there's no doubt that some inkling of the Grosser Kurfurst could have possibly been built. 

 

But the Royal Navy had no such plans. Their ultimate battleship design was the Lion class, which was neither innovative or remarkable. In all honesty they could have been copy and pasted from USN designs with some minor tweaking. Now, keen readers will be aware that I did not mention two guns in my table of Royal Navy guns larger than 343mm. They are the 18 inch (457mm) guns from the HMS Furious and the 18 inch guns planned for the N3. 

 

Here is their data compared to the other Tier 10 guns:

 

Ship Gun Name Shell Mass (kg) Muzzle Velocity (m/s) Damage Penetration @ 0 yards (mm)
Furious 457mm/40 Mk I 1506 683 14000 761.9
N3 457mm/45 Mk II 1506 762 14800 859.4
Yamato 460mm/45 Type94 1460 780 14800 863.2
Grosser Kurfurst 420mm L/48 Drh LC/40 1220 800 13500 853.1
Montana 406mm/50 Mk7 1225 762 13500 828.5

 

The guns from the HMS Furious are inferior in every way, yet at first glance, the 18 inch guns planned for the N3 are perfect. They match the capabilities of the Yamato's guns to a reasonable degree, even having similar damage and penetration characteristics.

 

The problem becomes what platform do you put them on?

 

The N3 class design would have featured nine 18 inch (457mm) guns arranged similarly to the Izumo class with six guns facing forward and three guns facing the rear with no ability to fire directly astern. The ship had no anti-aircraft guns to speak of in the design and a top speed of 23 knots. Turning her into a Tier 10 ship would require a massive boost in speed and the addition of modern AA and secondary guns. The ship would resemble the N3 class in nothing but the guns. Alternatively, you could put the 18 inch (457mm) guns on an enlarged Lion class platform. But if you do that, it's just another Yamato potentially with worse armor. Moreover the 457mm/45 Mk II design is from the 1920's and there is no historical basis for placing it on the Lion class ships.

 

Conclusion

The Royal Navy battleship line has likely posed a number of problems for the Wargaming staff and is likely the reason we have yet to see it in game. When it does come out (and I don't think there's any doubt that it will, eventually) I believe the Tier X will be an entirely fictional ship along the lines of the Roon and Hindenburg with elements taken from the N3, G3, and Lion class ships. As WG has stated that no guns larger that 18.1 inches (460mm) will be in the game, I think it's probable to see the Royal Navy's Tier X to have 18 inch (457mm) guns.

 

 

What the rest of it will look like?

 

Who can say.

Edited by Kelorn
  • Cool 24

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
629 posts
2,397 battles

It would be nice to see Orion instead of Colossus...

 

Agreed.
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10
[-Z-]
Alpha Tester
88 posts
1,667 battles

Good read. Fictional tier 10 wouldn't really be as much of a problem to end the line when you think of how often they did it in tanks :)

 

Edited by Lunarhawk
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,343 posts
3,378 battles

There's a few issues here.

 

The lower tiers are pretty simple with: 

 

Tier III - Dreadnought or Bellerophon

 

Tier IV - Orion

 

Tier V - Iron Duke

 

Tier VI - QE or Revenge

 

This is where it generally stops being simple and people start to argue.

 

Nelson should easily be the Tier VII British battleship. She fits into Tier VII perfectly with similar HP, AA and speed to every other Tier VII. She is superior in her gun layout and armor while her 16 inch guns are worst in class.

 

As for KGV, she is squarely a Tier VIII ship even with 14 inch guns. Once you give her a muzzle velocity buff with coastal super chargers, she generally falls in line with the other Tier VIII ships. Similar HP, AA, broadside, speed and best in class armor. She suffers with her 14 inch guns but they don't warrant her being put at Tier VII to utterly seal club. Giving her a 15 inch gun refit may be necessary but we will let Supertesters figure that out.

 

I agree for a Lion at Tier IX.

 

Tier X could be anything from a late 1945 Lion class design, heavily modernized N3, L3, L-III or a Frankenstein of everything above.

 

As for Vanguard and Hood, I think they should be Tier VIII and VII premiums respectively.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
209
[TSWAA]
Members
317 posts
6,813 battles

There's a few issues here.

 

The lower tiers are pretty simple with: 

 

Tier III - Dreadnought or Bellerophon

 

Tier IV - Orion

 

Tier V - Iron Duke

 

Tier VI - QE or Revenge

 

This is where it generally stops being simple and people start to argue.

 

Nelson should easily be the Tier VII British battleship. She fits into Tier VII perfectly with similar HP, AA and speed to every other Tier VII. She is superior in her gun layout and armor while her 16 inch guns are worst in class.

 

As for KGV, she is squarely a Tier VIII ship even with 14 inch guns. Once you give her a muzzle velocity buff with coastal super chargers, she generally falls in line with the other Tier VIII ships. Similar HP, AA, broadside, speed and best in class armor. She suffers with her 14 inch guns but they don't warrant her being put at Tier VII to utterly seal club. Giving her a 15 inch gun refit may be necessary but we will let Supertesters figure that out.

 

I agree for a Lion at Tier IX.

 

Tier X could be anything from a late 1945 Lion class design, heavily modernized N3, L3, L-III or a Frankenstein of everything above.

 

As for Vanguard and Hood, I think they should be Tier VIII and VII premiums respectively.

 

I can get on board with just about everything here, except maybe the KGV with 14 inch guns. We'll have to see how she works in game, but without a serious ROF buff, i think KGV with 14's would be pretty rough at T8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,343 posts
3,378 battles

 

I can get on board with just about everything here, except maybe the KGV with 14 inch guns. We'll have to see how she works in game, but without a serious ROF buff, i think KGV with 14's would be pretty rough at T8

 

If we give her super chargers, her muzzle velocity jumps up to 869 m/s, giving her a decent shell speed. A rotation speed buff will be needed however, even with her weaker penetration, the 14 inch guns of the KGV class had enough punch to deal with Scharnhorst and Bismarck to a lesser extent.

 

I'm not against 15 inch guns however, keeping 14 inch guns should be priority. 

Edited by xX_Critical_ClopOut69_Xx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
924 posts
6,699 battles

 

I can get on board with just about everything here, except maybe the KGV with 14 inch guns. We'll have to see how she works in game, but without a serious ROF buff, i think KGV with 14's would be pretty rough at T8

 

It's a shame those 14in guns are so are so underwhelming the KGV has an iconic look that I think would be a same to lose but if they can be maid to work then what can you do. :sceptic:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,085
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
4,720 posts

 

It's a shame those 14in guns are so are so underwhelming the KGV has an iconic look that I think would be a same to lose but if they can be maid to work then what can you do. :sceptic:

 

you put her at Tier7 where she belongs.

Share this post


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

 

you put her at Tier7 where she belongs.

 

Nelson wouldn't work as a tier 8 any better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2
[LOWF]
Members
16 posts
3,635 battles

 

I have to disagree with your 14" gun penetration analysis.  Your math looks fine that's not the issue but I was under the assumption that the British packed a very large bursting charge into the 14" guns and that is shown inreal life.  Dives on the Bismarks conning tower (14 inches of armor) where KGVs gun hit have shown that the armor in those locations was turned into Swiss cheese.   So understanding that the brits had created an excellent 14" shell with excellent armor penetration characteristics I feel make the guns decent for tier VIII.  

 

Also the KGVs armor scheme was second only to the mighty Yamato so sticking her into tier VII I believe would be asking for her to dominate the tier.  Anyways just my 2 cents means really nothing but it will be interesting to see how they move forward.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

I'm still working through but a couple of points. Range in game is set based of director height above the water. Also someone over on the EU forums worked out an approximation of WG'ing pen curves by backworking. linky:

http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/59528-armor-penetration-curves/

 

p.s if you go reading the thread on how he derived the curves, he starts with USN Empirical and then heavily modifies it. But thats not reflected in the OP of those threads. The pen curves in the linked thread are the result of the modified formulae.

 

If you get in touch he might be willing to do the 15" guns with various higher velocities. Math says a kII gun (note not turret, gun), with SC's would do 897m/s Mv.

 

 I have to disagree with your 14" gun penetration analysis.  Your math looks fine that's not the issue but I was under the assumption that the British packed a very large bursting charge into the 14" guns and that is shown inreal life.  Dives on the Bismarks conning tower (14 inches of armor) where KGVs gun hit have shown that the armor in those locations was turned into Swiss cheese.   So understanding that the brits had created an excellent 14" shell with excellent armor penetration characteristics I feel make the guns decent for tier VIII.  

 

Bursting charges are not modelled in game and pen is purely velicity/mass combo based. Ergo the british 14" will be worse than the New mex and about on par with New ork.

Edited by Carl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
11,668 posts

There's a few issues here.

 

The lower tiers are pretty simple with: 

 

Tier III - Dreadnought or Bellerophon

 

Tier IV - Orion

 

Tier V - Iron Duke

 

Tier VI - QE or Revenge

 

This is where it generally stops being simple and people start to argue.

 

Nelson should easily be the Tier VII British battleship. She fits into Tier VII perfectly with similar HP, AA and speed to every other Tier VII. She is superior in her gun layout and armor while her 16 inch guns are worst in class.

 

As for KGV, she is squarely a Tier VIII ship even with 14 inch guns. Once you give her a muzzle velocity buff with coastal super chargers, she generally falls in line with the other Tier VIII ships. Similar HP, AA, broadside, speed and best in class armor. She suffers with her 14 inch guns but they don't warrant her being put at Tier VII to utterly seal club. Giving her a 15 inch gun refit may be necessary but we will let Supertesters figure that out.

 

I agree for a Lion at Tier IX.

 

Tier X could be anything from a late 1945 Lion class design, heavily modernized N3, L3, L-III or a Frankenstein of everything above.

 

As for Vanguard and Hood, I think they should be Tier VIII and VII premiums respectively.

 

 

The 14" supercharged shells won't solve the situation created by WG's autobounce/overmatch mechanics that solely favors caliber.  Which means if a USN battleship is bow on to you, the KGV with its 14" guns, supercharged or not, will see those shells relentlessly bounce off.

 

The 15" Mark II guns are simply a more elegant solution after all.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

 f we give her super chargers, her muzzle velocity jumps up to 869 m/s, giving her a decent shell speed.

 

Still only comparable to new mex. Which is inadequate.Seriously 14" guns do not and never will cut it at T8, neither will any 15" (unless she's a brawler), less than the MkII's firing supercharges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
11,668 posts

 

I have to disagree with your 14" gun penetration analysis.  Your math looks fine that's not the issue but I was under the assumption that the British packed a very large bursting charge into the 14" guns and that is shown inreal life.  Dives on the Bismarks conning tower (14 inches of armor) where KGVs gun hit have shown that the armor in those locations was turned into Swiss cheese.   So understanding that the brits had created an excellent 14" shell with excellent armor penetration characteristics I feel make the guns decent for tier VIII.  

 

Also the KGVs armor scheme was second only to the mighty Yamato so sticking her into tier VII I believe would be asking for her to dominate the tier.  Anyways just my 2 cents means really nothing but it will be interesting to see how they move forward.

 

 

 

Burst charges are completely disregarded in this game.  Otherwise, the Soviet 152mm will have the biggest HE damage for any 6" gun in the game.

 

Even then, a 16" shell weighs anything from 300kg to 500kg more than the KGV's 14" shell.  That's the equivalent of a 14" shell with an 11" shell for bonus.  You can't "out charge" these massive shells.

 

The German 380mm has around 80kg more of weight --- which is more than a complete 6" shell --- and has nearly 90 mps second of muzzle velocity for advantage, not to mention, a superior rate of fire and turret traverse.

 

The KGV's massively overweight turrets --- due to its high armor and having four guns --- means it turns like the Warspite's, and for that reason, those 14" guns has no rate of fire advantage over 16" guns, and worst yet, turns really slow --- heck even the Nelrod's 16" gun turrets turn much faster.

 

When you extend to other potential Tier 8s, the Littorio and Richelieu for example, their shell weight advantages extend way past 100kg, its virtually the weight of a complete 8" shell for bonus, and the muzzle velocity advantages extend to 100 mps and more.

 

KGV can start with 14" guns as default, then upgrade to 15" guns, so you can have the option, before leading to the Lion class in the next tier.  Lion class is essentially an improved KGV with 16" guns.   Those 16" guns are not as good as the USN's mind you, so the Lion class armor has to make up for it.

 

Edited by Eisennagel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
14,008 posts
5,814 battles

Wargaming will probably just make it up as they go along and give the RN BBs some kind of mystical super AP that won't overpen DDs, ignores angling that would bounce other AP shells, or something like that.

 

You think WG cares about historical accuracy? They're much more interested in national flavouring imho. 

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
11,668 posts

Wargaming will probably just make it up as they go along and give the RN BBs some kind of mystical super AP that won't overpen DDs, ignores angling that would bounce other AP shells, or something like that.

 

You think WG cares about historical accuracy? They're much more interested in national flavouring imho. 

 

 

 

 

Very true.  They also have national flavor for disadvantages --- 4km torps for Russian destroyers, high dispersion for German battleships, catastrophic citadels for British cruisers.  For British battleships, likely catastrophic citadels, really slow turret traverse ala Warspite, and for compensation, probably citadel heals.  Hopefully not increased detonation chances.

 

 

Share this post


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

HMS Hood, pride of the Royal Navy, could be an interesting fit here. With 381mm guns with Mark II turrets, her range could be in excess of 20km,

 

You made a terrible mistake in including any suggestion of a tier for KGV and Nelson! Joking - but I can see this only getting sidetracked there... Good work though, liking the chart.

 

First general observation I would have is that as WG appears to use formula's to derive AP damage, the commonly held wisdom(!) is that firing range is solely derived from height of main director. Most ships in-game are limited compared to their historic ranges. Any discussion of what a gun could achieve is wasted time unfortunately.

 

Second observation, on Hood specifically - standing off at long range with Warspite-esque shell ballistics (even if you get new vs. used guns for a hot 2% better MV) you're going to struggle to get hits. It's not just penetration, flight time to target is important. Warspite struggles to hit cruisers (in my experience) at range as her shell flight times give plenty of time to maneuver. Long range for Warspite is 16km, let alone 20km. 752m/s compares unfavorably to... everything.

 

Third observation, shell flight 'time to target' would be a worthy addition. Navweaps has it for some guns, but is usually lacking it for BB. Perhaps it can be formula'd out too.

 

 

Nice work.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

 

Second observation, on Hood specifically - standing off at long range with Warspite-esque shell ballistics (even if you get new vs. used guns for a hot 2% better MV) you're going to struggle to get hits. It's not just penetration, flight time to target is important. Warspite struggles to hit cruisers (in my experience) at range as her shell flight times give plenty of time to maneuver. Long range for Warspite is 16km, let alone 20km. 752m/s compares unfavorably to... everything

 

Yes and velocity loss over range is a huge thing too. heavier shells do better in that regard. Curious as i don;t own her, what IS warspite flight time to max range?

 

 You made a terrible mistake in including any suggestion of a tier for KGV and Nelson! Joking - but I can see this only getting sidetracked there... Good work though, liking the chart.

 

So true :lol:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

 The 14" supercharged shells won't solve the situation created by WG's autobounce/overmatch mechanics that solely favors caliber.  Which means if a USN battleship is bow on to you, the KGV with its 14" guns, supercharged or not, will see those shells relentlessly bounce off.

 

You do know T7/8 BB's can auto bounce 15" too...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
522
[IN3PT]
Beta Testers
1,703 posts
6,511 battles

Wargaming will probably just make it up as they go along and give the RN BBs some kind of mystical super AP that won't overpen DDs, ignores angling that would bounce other AP shells, or something like that.

 

You think WG cares about historical accuracy? They're much more interested in national flavouring imho

 

 

 

This is distressingly true :(

 

To contribute to the OP though, I'd like to bring in this ship for consideration at tier 10:

 

http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/47344-consider-the-possible-rn-post-wnt-tier-x-bb/#topmost

 

Please excuse the horrid linking, doing this on my phone 

Share this post


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

If KGV is allowed to have the 14", they will likely be restricted to the stock hull, with any upgraded hulls auto-upgrading to the 15" Mark IIs.  Otherwise, 14" KGV will be restricted to Premium with soft buffs just to make her fit as a sort-of cruiser hunting sniper (likely ahistorical RoF; say 25s and good accuracy, but still same atrocious traverse).

 

T9 will probably be a kitbashed Lion, taking elements from all the Lion designs to make a working T9.  WG did it for some of the imaginary refit hulls for the KM BBs, and also for the Roon and Hindenburg designs.  To a lesser extent, FdG and GK too (the former fuses H39 with some elements of H41, and GK fuses H40B with German designed triples sold to Russia).

 

T10 will likely pull from the 1920s super battleship plans, such as L2 or N3, and just undergo a complete modernization to fit the tier (similar to how Roon and Hindenburg were based off design plans and heavily upgraded to fit the tier).  Realistically, I'd expect N3 with the Izumo setup, and her 457mm cannons providing her with some major punch.

 

As far as oddball flavors go, WG could remove HE and just give RN AP some spalling damage; simulating the same AoE effect as HE has on modules and secondaries/AA, but also doing damage to the main ship itself as well.  Though I doubt it given that they found AP w/ spalling too OP way back when.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,399
[BLNCE]
Members
13,459 posts
44,054 battles

There is yet another option.

 

For T6 put the upgraded Revenge class BBs. 

For T7 put the QEs in their latest of late-war configurations and maybe give them an ROF boost and tight shell groupings. They'd be playable.

For T8 the KGV in either 14" with high ROF or 15" with normal ROF. Frankly ROF is way more important than gun size anyway. The Bismarck and Tirp are competitive with 8 15" guns at that tier. Surely the KGV would be with excellent armor and 10 guns with decent ROF. Not to mention you can tinker with the dispersion to ensure enough hits that gun size and pen is less important. 

For T9 and T10, as the OP suggests.

 

The Nelson? The NelRods don't go in the tech tree at all. The Rodney is sold as a premium T7 once its ROF, dispersion, and secondaries are balanced. Then you eliminate the problem of where to put the NelRods. And mint money for WG. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Taichunger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

 Surely the KGV would be with excellent armor and 10 guns with decent ROF. Not to mention you can tinker with the dispersion to ensure enough hits that gun size and pen is less important. 

 

The problem is the Tirpitz Bismark are hardcore brawler, their long rnage pen which is frankly right on the lower limits of viable just doesn't matter because they don't shoot that far very often.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×