Developer Diaries: British Battleships

[MajorRenegade]

 

[anonym_Hf93Jbjm9WjT]

No mention of Nelson, mention of Vanguard as an underpowered Lion (t9) suggests t8 premium is planned. Higher tiers seem designed to be played like BCs, run, gun, and retreat. Devs look and sound greyed out (or 'knackered', to speak British), drained (or maybe just hungover...)

[Dr_Venture]

I'd give them more credit than that, when dealing with her Majesty's government in regards to ANYTHING...it can be incredibly taxing. 

 

Having lived there for five years, I can tell stories of British bureaucracy that could make you weep. Imagine a Russian company trying to get military technical documents. 

[AJTP89]

They have set themselves up for their premiums. Dreadnought at T3 (How can you not include THE battleship). Vanguard at T8 (probably with buffed guns). Nelson is at T7, as we know. Probably they'll have another KGV class as a premium somewhere too.

Dreadnought really ticks me off. The others have justifiable balance/progression reasons for not going into the line. The exclusion of Dreadnought is a clear and obvious money grab.

[Middcore]

1 minute ago, AJTP89 said:

They have set themselves up for their premiums. Dreadnought at T3 (How can you not include THE battleship). Vanguard at T8 (probably with buffed guns). Nelson is at T7, as we know. Probably they'll have another KGV class as a premium somewhere too.

 

Yeah yeah whatever just give me Renown. 

[anonym_Hf93Jbjm9WjT]

11 minutes ago, Dr_Venture said:

I'd give them more credit than that, when dealing with her Majesty's government in regards to ANYTHING...it can be incredibly taxing. 

 

Having lived there for five years, I can tell stories of British bureaucracy that could make you weep. Imagine a Russian company trying to get military technical documents. 

Well I was expressing my sympathy, though if you had to actually live there, you had it far worse than the devs, who at worst only had to visit...!

[sulghunter331]

"Stealth will play a role" So... a line past tier 7 that plays like a stealth specced Missouri?

[YamatoA150]

35 minutes ago, AJTP89 said:

They have set themselves up for their premiums. ... Vanguard at T8 (probably with buffed guns). ... Probably they'll have another KGV class as a premium somewhere too.

 

Vanguard will probably get the 15" MkII like Monarch.  It'll need that much to deal any kind of consistent damage with the main guns, unless WG is expecting players to just spam the HE from the 15" MkIs. AA isn't a problem, and her speed will be good, her rudder shift will be better than it should be, and only limited by a giant turning radius. She'd also get the buffed 45s traverse, so that also helps her out. The gun upgrade is all Vanguard needs, unless we're to expect 3 Premiums in a row using 15" MkI guns, with 2 of them really only adding an AA advantage to them (Hood's special AA, then Vanguard being more of the same but with conventional and superior AA).

 

As for a KGV Premium; PoW at T6, where high HP and strong armor (excluding the bow and aft) will be the selling point alongside good 14" guns, but she will have her historical above-water citadel and the lack of AA in compensation.

[Middcore]

22 minutes ago, _RC1138 said:

I finally did the math on it; IFHE will be well worth it on the KGV. It gains 115.7mm (not 116 they don't round up for IFHE calcs) of penetration. It can cit pen *every* cruiser at it's tier Range (5-9) except Cleveland, New Orleans and Baltimore. Something to bear in mind when equipping your captains for it.

This is interesting, can anybody confirm? 
 

Quote

 

I'm hoping for a CC tree:

3: Invincible

4: Lion

5: Queen Mary

6: Renown

7: Admiral

8: G3

 

 

 

 

Lion and Queen Mary are essentially the same ship. I think it would be more likely:

 

3: Invincible

4: Princess Royal (to avoid re-using the name Lion)

5: Tiger (also very close to PR/Lion but better turret layout, soft stats, and fictional interwar rebuild hull)

6: Renown

7: "Admiral" class

 

You could do G3 at T8 I guess but I'm fine with the line ending at T7. I think they said they wouldn't do any more lines that didn't go all the way to T10 but at this tier all the BB's are basically the "fast battleships" the battlecruiser concept evolved into anyway so I don't see the need to make up additional paper monstrosities just to get to T10. 

[Dunk_Master_Flex]

7 minutes ago, Middcore said:

This is interesting, can anybody confirm? 
 

 

Lion and Queen Mary are essentially the same ship. I think it would be more likely:

 

3: Invincible

4: Princess Royal (to avoid re-using the name Lion)

5: Tiger (also very close to PR/Lion but better turret layout, soft stats, and fictional interwar rebuild hull)

6: Renown

7: "Admiral" class

 

You could do G3 at T8 I guess but I'm fine with the line ending at T7. I think they said they wouldn't do any more lines that didn't go all the way to T10 but at this tier all the BB's are basically the "fast battleships" the battlecruiser concept evolved into anyway so I don't see the need to make up additional paper monstrosities just to get to T10. 

 

3: Indefiatiable 

4: Princess Royal

5: Tiger

6: Renown

7: Admiral

8: J3 design

9: G3

10: K2 or K3

[Wolcott]

44 minutes ago, AJTP89 said:

The exclusion of Dreadnought is a clear and obvious money grab.

So was Hood.

27 minutes ago, _RC1138 said:

I'm hoping for a CC tree:

With WG focused on Pan Asia atm I doubt a British battlecruiser line is in their plans, especially considering BBs and BCs take the longest to model.

8 minutes ago, Middcore said:

4: Princess Royal (to avoid re-using the name Lion)

Personally I prefer the tier 4 ship be named Lion, not the one at tier 9. I mean this is the Lion that was Beatty's flagship and served at Jutland we're talking about. Princess Royal is still a lovely name though.

[Middcore]

Just now, Wolcott said:

Personally I prefer the tier 4 ship be named Lion, not the one at tier 9. I mean this is the Lion that was Beatty's flagship and served at Jutland we're talking about. 

 

This ship (no pun intended) has sailed. 

[SinqueScheiDeMona]

Did I see Aeronautica Militare on a shirt? 

[StoptheViolins]

Here's a top down look at the BB line.  So the Monarch and Lion aren't derivative.  But the Monarch is of the KGV?

[MajorRenegade]

Just now, StoptheViolins said:

Here's a top down look at the BB line.  So the Monarch and Lion aren't derivative.  But the Monarch is of the KGV?

Monarch is a KGV but a improved version. WG gave it a madeup name "Monarch" to avoid confusion with the tier 7 KGV

[Trainspite]

Just now, StoptheViolins said:

Here's a top down look at the BB line.  So the Monarch and Lion aren't derivative.  But the Monarch is of the KGV?

 

All you need to know about Monarch is below. 

 

In the same vein that the Germans had their triple turret designs. Or Henri IV has her 240mm guns. Monarch has her 15" guns. Same guns as 15C, but the ship itself is quite different. Meaning 15C is not Monarch. This means that WG have made Monarch up. They have designed a ship around 3x 3 15" guns, in the same way they have designed ships around the triple 8"or 16" turrets for the Germans. These ships have been made up by WG, and therefore are fake. They have been designed around some criteria, and don't represent a real design. Monarch is a WG thought design that appears to be very very loosely based on 15C, since no aspects of 15C aside from the guns seem to survive in Monarch. 

 

Length:

Monarch: 227.2m

KGV: 227.1m

15C: 225.6m (wl)

 

Seems like WG have stolen a KGV hull for Monarch.

 

It also seems like WG have stolen Nelson turrets for Monarch, while 15C, KGV and the preliminary designs would have the squared off appearance as seen on KGV. Blast from the past, or just laziness in creating a model?

 

It also looks like WG have stolen KGV's secondaries for Monarch as well. 15C would have 10x 2 4.5". KGV had her 8x 2 5.25". Sure if 15C was developed further it could have gotten these. But 15C was abandoned before the 5.25" gun was adopted. Do we want a 15C as planned, or a quasi-15C which been developed more? Personally, I would go for as the design says, given it needs no improvement.

 

Monarch also manages to push herself along at 30kn, despite supposedly displacing the same as a KGV, while KGV can only go 28, 29kn if she pushes it? 15C was going to be a similar speed to KGV, given the data for 15C. 

Somehow Monarch has gained a '1945' refit no KGV received, meaning she has retained her catapult, and somehow gained lattice masts that no other RN BB, even Vanguard, got. 

 

Monarch was announced/released after the rest of the RN BBs.

 

Is it starting to look a bit suspicious for you? Do I need to be clearer in getting my point across?

 

 

Personally, I like the name. That is more due to personal preferences though.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

If you are wondering, the nameplate reads Monarch. The steam locomotive used to work in my area, and I have seen the thing for real in Wales. 

 

The problem a lot of people have with the name is that it is not representative of what the ship would be named, given Monarch would take the place of KGV. Monarch, while encompassing the naming theme of the first 3 ships of the class, would not be a name under consideration for the ship. I'm not too fussed though. Fake name for a fake ship is fine. 

 

[SinqueScheiDeMona]

@StoptheViolins

 

it is supposed to be of the 15C or something project. @mofton can give the details. WG uses this project however there where several differences including secondaries while WGs Monarch is 15" rifles, Nelson turret and everything else KGV?

 

@Phoenix_jz check out that shirt. Totally means Aquila is next! 

[SinqueScheiDeMona]

What about multiple armor layer cruisers? French and Italian will the HE explode in a void or is timer longer than AP?

[StoptheViolins]

Buut..... why the new fake T X when the British had the Vanguard.  Why fake something that was real.  Also the description of glass cannon comes to mind after T VI and also begs the question why not just build out the Battlecruiser while implementing the British line?

[Trainspite]

Just now, StoptheViolins said:

Buut..... why the new fake T X when the British had the Vanguard.  Why fake something that was real.  Also the description of glass cannon comes to mind after T VI and also begs the question why not just build out the Battlecruiser while implementing the British line?

 

Vanguard can't manage tier 10 without ridiculous buffs. Think halving her reload from 30s to 15s or something crazy like that. Tier 8 premium would have been the best place for her.

 

BCs are probably in the plans, just some way down the priorities, since we still have no Italian lines yet, for example. 

[Middcore]

Monarch isn't a terrible name but it's damn generic. Surely there are enough unused historical RN ship names to have picked something more memorable.

Conqueror actually bothers me a bit more because Conqueror was a name assigned to a Lion class ship. If it was up to me the T10 would have been Victory - only wrinkle there is is I don't know if Nelson's Victory is still considered "in commission" but I am not too bothered by that.

 

13 minutes ago, StoptheViolins said:

Buut..... why the new fake T X when the British had the Vanguard.  Why fake something that was real.  

 

The historical Vanguard would in no way be competitive at T10. It was essentially a ship put together from spare parts, with WW1-era armament. If it shows up in the game it will probably be as a T8 premium. 

[mofton]

12 minutes ago, SparvieroVV said:

it is supposed to be of the 15C or something project. @mofton can give the details.

I'd defer to Mr. Trainspite and he outlines it in the post above yours (probably posted while you were typing).

My TLDR is Monarch isn't 15-C but due to being a KGV and armed with 15in is commonly called one.

15-C is one of the laziest copy-paste jobs we've had in the game in a long time.

54 minutes ago, YamatoA150 said:

Vanguard will probably get the 15" MkII like Monarch.  It'll need that much to deal any kind of consistent damage with the main guns, unless WG is expecting players to just spam the HE from the 15" MkIs

I didn't think there was much between the Mk. I w/Super charges and the Mk. II without?

[MaliceA4Thought]

16 minutes ago, Middcore said:

 I don't know if Nelson's Victory is still considered "in commission" but I am not too bothered by that).

Yes it is and still flies the White Ensign

Flagship of the First Sealord..  Admrl Sir Phillip Jones  (I believe)

Currently commanding officer (the 101st)  I believe is Lt Cmdr Brian Smith unless its changed in the last couple of years since I was around.

M

[SinqueScheiDeMona]

Honestly the way BBritish HE is looking I don't want to take out a ship lacking a heal until the numbers have died down. 

[SinqueScheiDeMona]

Indeed Mofton I did not. Apologies to trainspite.