British BB's are WONKY!

[Thewavis]

This thread will be about the current British Designs for in game. So far they are too "American" aka no citadel showing at all above water line unless they are premium BB's like Nelson and Hood. Here is a tier by tier comparison of British and Japanese BB's to illustrate the differences in composition. We all know the British had better armor than the IJN but to give them incredible belts AND no visible citadel while the Japanese suffer from broken armor schemes, (think Yamato) while the British line suffers from no real issues save for poor torpedo defense is quite shameful considering Japanese BB design was heavily influenced by Jackie Fisher and the Royal Navy. Also if you see "SUPER HEAL!" please say it with a quasi Micky Mouse (Registered Trademark of Disney Incorporated, not subject for reuse or publications without owner's consent) voice!

So starting at Tier 3:

T3 Bellerophon: Citadel BELOW main belt armor.

T3 Kawachi: A Dreadnought redesigned from a Pre-Dreadnought. Also one of Japan's first all big gun battleships. Citadel BEHIND main belt.

T4 Orion: Citadel BELOW Main belt

T4 Myogi: Citadel BEHIND Main belt

T5 Iron Duke: Citadel BELOW Main Belt

T5 Kongo: Citadel BEHIND Main Belt

T6 Queen Elizabeth: Citadel BELOW Main Belt

T6 Fuso: Citadel BEHIND Main Belt

T7 King George V: Citadel BELOW Main Belt, B turret Barbette does not extend to citadel box, thus making an "invis -a-zone" for shells to pass through and not obtain critical damage.

T7 Nagato: Citadel BEHIND Main Belt

T8 Monarch: Citadel BELOW Main Belt, B turret Barbette does not extend to citadel box, thus making an "invis -a-zone" for shells to pass through and not obtain critical damage. Also includes "SUPER HEAL!" (Que "Mickey Mouse" voice acting)

T8 Amagi: Citadel BEHIND Main Belt.

T9 Lion: Citadel BELOW Main Belt, B turret Barbette does not extend to citadel box, thus making an "invis -a-zone" for shells to pass through and not obtain critical damage. Also includes "SUPER HEAL!"

T9 Izumo: Citadel BEHIND Main Belt.

T10 Conqueror: Citadel BELOW Main Belt, B turret Barbette does not extend to citadel box, thus making an "invis -a-zone" for shells to pass through and not obtain critical damage. Also includes "SUPER HEAL!"

T10 Yamato: Citadel BEHIND Main Belt, Broken armor scheme, "SUPER HEAL!" taken away at community request two years ago because of "balance" issues. Yamato has the most robust citadel armor scheme in the game yet she is CONSISTENTLY citadelled  in every match she participates in. look at the angles of that box and look at armor thickness and tell me it should be next to impossible to put a shell through that unless you are literally 8km away or less.

I apologize to anyone if my comparison and rant is getting old or obnoxious, but this no hit citadel started because of American BB players who were getting punished for sailing broadside and complained. Now the British BB line gets the special buff, the Germans have turtle back but what about the Japanese? Why can't Yamato have her "SUPER HEAL!" back and her armor fixed to work as it should. She has the slowest turrets in the game but it is frustrating when you are citadelled all the time and a fire knocks off more than 1/3 of her health while other BB's do quite well in terms of fires and damage. I have had Yamato twice and I sold it twice because there seemed to be too much going against it.

Here is where the citadel lowering began:

Montana Old: Citadel BEHIND Main Belt

Montana New: Citadel BELOW Main Belt

Were the Citadel roofs weakened as compensation? Yes! Does it matter? Not really because it further erodes skill from the game.

In effect I am asking Wargaming and I hope some of you agree that it is high time the Japanese BB line either get the same buffs to their citadels or fix the American and British BB line, especially the T7 to T10 in regards to the Barbette's of B turret (Y Turret for Conqueror) so citadel shots can be registered, by bringing their citadels back to behind the main belt. It takes away the "Allied BB's" an advantage in battle when there is nothing critical for the Main Belt to defend against while Japanese BB's have to constantly angle and get lol penned at range or up close. Japanese BB's have been getting the short end of the stick as of late and need to be addressed before any new lines come available, including Kii. Please developers, look at the comparison shots with interest and realize that what this post is about is making ALL BB's comparable in terms of armor and protection because at one time they were until the US players got what they wanted while Japanese BB players have been ignored. I vote for raising the citadels back to former heights and adjusting the British BB line accordingly for what is the sense of Main Belt protection if it is not protecting anything vital? Why are barbettes on British T7 to T10 not extending to the citadel box? It does not make any sense and the Brits already get cruiser DELETING AP and HE that is atrociously OP compared to other nations as well as HEALS that replace all FIRE damage and design layouts that make AP harder to find good penetrations?

Thank you for your consideration

[Fog_Repair_Ship_Akashi]

Right...so the fact they have the best guns, best range and with the exception of the tier VII and IX has the best torp protection, and with the exception of 1 ship the best health is not enough? All i see as i read this is....

[Thewavis]

The best guns ONLY matter when RNG is in your favor. Range is equitable to other nations by a difference of 1 to 2 km. Don't bother to post if you are going to troll.

It makes sense, you are a tester for Wargaming, you defend all that is Wargaming, it is okay... This post is for the Dev's to show comparable differences between lines and a line that has been ignored numerous times over the past two years while other's get adjusted. What is so wrong with asking for fixes? All of my points concerning Yamato can be researched and I am sure if you took the time to actually think versus post stupid anime pictures that do nothing to further the conversation, you will see that I am correct.

If you cannot than maybe you should delete your post because it is childish. I went to great lengths to obtain evidence and not just rant so there you have Mister Super Tester... Mister Wargaming schill. Enjoy your time trolling the boards and knocking anyone who makes a cohesive argument for balance. maybe, just for you, I will do one on HE percentages for comparison to show that certain lines are getting needless buffs and attention, at the detriment of others. okay?

Let me know with another of your over simplified, picture heavy, childish replies

[GrandAdmiral_2016]

IJN and USN BB driver? Move to the German BB line and make the same comparison, please...then look at all the premium ships...different design philosphies for different navies. This is a game, not a history book. There are some things I don't like about every ship line because they are historically inaccurate except for exterior appearances (and these RN BBs are superbly modelled and skinned BTW-I build 3D models as a hobby). That does not stop me from having fun playing the game. And BTW, these RN BBs are very sinkable. Have already sunk a few, in fact....

[Thewavis]

I never said they are UNSINKABLE but there is an obvious flavor being shown and it is not for the better. How do you know what is a design philosophy versus developer mechanic? You can't and you won;t unless you find line drawings. Yes the is a video game but there comes a point when gimmicks need to stop and players need to learn how to play their ships weaknesses as well as their strengths instead of mitigating the deficiencies for those who cannot play.

[Thewavis]

It looks like the British Line copied the German line in terms of citadels, German's are turtle backed and below the waterline as well. So now we have the German's, British AND American';s with Citadels below the waterline EXCEPT the Japanese. How is that correct and how does that further your argument? You can make a game "arcady" but to artificially make all lines but Japan nearly citadel proof is not fair or equitable. Japanese BB's cannot push and brawl but should everyone else be able to? I do not consider this crying or whining but it is becoming apparent that a certain line is being left behind.

[MaliceA4Thought]

19 minutes ago, Thewavis said:

It makes sense, you are a tester for Wargaming, you defend all that is Wargaming, it is okay...

Since you show this lack of comprehension and this statement is obviously wrong, then it throws doubt on everything else you say.

All an Alpha tester is/was was someone who got early access to the game and played it to provide statistical feedback.  That does not in anyway mean they are a tester or a wargaming shill which you would like to believe since they disagree with you and surely anyone who disagrees with you must be an apologist.. right?.

M

[Thewavis]

Here are comparisons to ACTUAL line drawings of an Iowa Class BB from 1951 and the game version. In this you will see that The line drawing shows the citadel box above the waterline, protected by the main belt where as in game, it has been lowered to satisfy "Whiners".

Explain how this is Fair?

Please?

Actual US Navy line drawing showing Citadel box showing above waterline, protected by Main Belt.

Iowa In-Game: Artificially lowered Citadel, was not like this before.

[Thewavis]

4 minutes ago, MaliceA4Thought said:

Since you show this lack of comprehension and this statement is obviously wrong, then it throws doubt on everything else you say.

All an Alpha tester is/was was someone who got early access to the game and played it to provide statistical feedback.  That does not in anyway mean they are a tester or a wargaming shill which you would like to believe since they disagree with you and surely anyone who disagrees with you must be an apologist.. right?.

M

This Statement above, right here, with out actually reading is proof of what I just said, thank you very much for making my point for me. I guess you did not see that one coming did you?

He is only disagreeing because he wants to take a cheap shot at anyone who fights the system. Being a tester, I am sure he agreed that American BB's were too squishy... I am sure you tested as well so you are defending the recommendations you made to the DEV team to strengthen certain lines over others.

I have respect for Brothers-In-Arms but I do not respect those who defend people who do not take the time to read and understand someone else's point of view and provide constructive feed back. You have shown yourself to be no better than the first. Thank you.

[MaliceA4Thought]

1 minute ago, Thewavis said:

This Statement above, right here, with out actually reading is proof of what I just said, thank you very much for making my for me. I guess you did not see that one coming did you?

He is only disagreeing because he wants too take a cheap shot at anyone who fights the system. Being a tester, I am sure he agreed that American BB's were too squishy... I am sure you tested as well so you are defending the recommendations you made to the DEV team to strengthen certain lines over others.

I have respect for Brothers-In-Arms but i do not respect those who defend people who do not take the time to read and understand someone else's point of view and provide contructive feed back. You have shown yourself to be no better than the first. Thank you.

you're welcome:)

M

[Thewavis]

:)

[Thewavis]

24 minutes ago, GrandAdmiral_2016 said:

IJN and USN BB driver? Move to the German BB line and make the same comparison, please...then look at all the premium ships...different design philosphies for different navies. This is a game, not a history book. There are some things I don't like about every ship line because they are historically inaccurate except for exterior appearances (and these RN BBs are superbly modelled and skinned BTW-I build 3D models as a hobby). That does not stop me from having fun playing the game. And BTW, these RN BBs are very sinkable. Have already sunk a few, in fact....

Subject in point, Nelson and Hood versus rest of line, They have citadels behind the belt, above the water line while the rest of the British BB line does not, that is not a "philosophy, it is pure developer choice.

[JojoTheMongol]

38 minutes ago, Fog_Repair_Ship_Akashi said:

Right...so the fact they have the best guns, best range and with the exception of the tier VII and IX has the best torp protection, and with the exception of 1 ship the best health is not enough? All i see as i read this is....

 

Why in the hell do people always quote the entire OP? Its a [edited]epidemic on this forum.

[Thewavis]

T7 Nelson: Premium BB, citadel behind Main Belt. Is this a "Design Philosophy" when King George at T7 and other ships below have their citadels below the waterline?

T7 Hood: Premium BB. Citadel below the water line but if you notice the angles of the box, she can be penned after punching through the main belt thus a ship that does take citadel damage. Is this a "Design Philosophy?" Possibly. Is Wargaming hiding deficiencies in design for play ability or is it because they are "fan boys"?

All I am arguing for is a fair and equitable balance of the citadel box for the Japanese Line like the rest fo the lines in this game or raise the citadel boxes back to designed specifications like the game was originally built upon.

[Thewavis]

I already answered that JoJo... Please see above for initial reply.

[Fog_Repair_Ship_Akashi]

27 minutes ago, JojoTheMongol said:

 

Why in the hell do people always quote the entire OP? Its a [edited]epidemic on this forum.

Because it helps to prove the point particularly for this perfect gif.

[JojoTheMongol]

We know he is replying to the freaking OP. No need to repost all 20 [edited]pictures. If anything it distracts from the point you are trying to make!

[Fog_Repair_Ship_Akashi]

1 hour ago, Thewavis said:

Here are comparisons to ACTUAL line drawings of an Iowa Class BB from 1951 and the game version. In this you will see that The line drawing shows the citadel box above the waterline, protected by the main belt where as in game, it has been lowered to satisfy "Whiners".

Explain how this is Fair?

Please?

Actual US Navy line drawing showing Citadel box showing above waterline, protected by Main Belt.

Iowa In-Game: Artificially lowered Citadel, was not like this before.

Yah...small problem with your waterline drawing. You have it too low. The Iowa sits lower in the water than what you describe (especially when fully loaded for combat). and your 'blueprints prove me right" argument is [edited]. After all it's not like people used the blueprints to show that Wargaming had the citadel too high but that's just me.

[Commissar_Carl]

After doing a solid 30-ish minutes of research into the subject, I have determined that the reason that the british BB's have below water citadels  in game is because they had below water citadels in real life.  

shocking, I know.

layout drawings for HMS Dreadnought (which are very easy to find and are virtually the same for Bellerophon) indicate this, from the drawing below. 

as indicated, the shellrooms and machinery spaces are all visible only in the C plane, which is below the marked waterline. and because the philosophy based on this won't change until after the first world war with Nelson and KGV, tiers 3 through 6 are correct in having below water citadels. they were not artificially lowered to meet some gameplay need. 

as for KGV onward, lets look at this diagram. 

the shell rooms and magazines are located deep within the ship, well below the waterline, so their citadel placement is correct as well. and because Monarch is just KGV with 15 inch guns and Lion is just KGV with 16 inch guns, their citadels are low as well. and before you say "Nelson has a high citadel in game!" that's because nelson has a high citadel in real life. as shown below. 

for comparison look at Nagato's armor because it was easy to find. 

the citadel extends above the waterline because the Japanese had a different design philosophy compared to the British. 

so I'm sorry, but it isn't that the British BB's have artificially lowered citadels, its that the British design practices in WWI and WWII made for well protected and underwater citadels. 

[Fog_Repair_Ship_Akashi]

35 minutes ago, Thewavis said:

T7 Nelson: Premium BB, citadel behind Main Belt. Is this a "Design Philosophy" when King George at T7 and other ships below have their citadels below the waterline?

T7 Hood: Premium BB. Citadel below the water line but if you notice the angles of the box, she can be penned after punching through the main belt thus a ship that does take citadel damage. Is this a "Design Philosophy?" Possibly. Is Wargaming hiding deficiencies in design for play ability or is it because they are "fan boys"?

All I am arguing for is a fair and equitable balance of the citadel box for the Japanese Line like the rest fo the lines in this game or raise the citadel boxes back to designed specifications like the game was originally built upon.

The Nelson's citadel was above the waterline in real life due to the restricted space and tonnage given by the Washington Naval treaty (also she had to fit through the Suez and Panama canals) because of this she was 'skinny' pushing her citadel above the waterline. As for the Hood? Her citadel was supposed to be above the waterline as well but she was overweight once extra armor was added following the results of the Battle of Jutland. The additional armour added during construction increased her draught by about 4 feet (1.2 m) at deep load, which reduced her freeboard and made her very wet. At full speed, or in heavy seas, water would flow over the ship's quarterdeck and often entered the messdecks and living quarters through ventilation shafts. This characteristic earned her the nickname of "the largest submarine in the Navy".The persistent dampness, coupled with the ship's poor ventilation, was blamed for the high incidence of tuberculosis aboard. this fact is therefore reflected in game with the lower citadel, like how the North Carolina's detection range is so small because of the USS Washington.

[KongoPride]

Someone is a bit defensive of their work of art.  I think OP may be a bit bias here because he plays a very high percentage of his games in Japanese battleships.  There is more to this gane than a diagram with a highlighted citadel layout.

[WanderingGhost]

The rest, having not yet really played the UK ones, or shot at them, I can not speak to. However, I can speak to the comment on German armour and citadel hits - yes, point blank near impossible to do, but the German BB's can be hit in the citadel at range, by the likes of IJN ships, from plunging fire through the deck, also pat of why German BB's are getting wrecked by AP bomb hits.

[Fog_Repair_Ship_Akashi]

2 hours ago, Thewavis said:

The best guns ONLY matter when RNG is in your favor. Range is equitable to other nations by a difference of 1 to 2 km. Don't bother to post if you are going to troll.

It makes sense, you are a tester for Wargaming, you defend all that is Wargaming, it is okay... This post is for the Dev's to show comparable differences between lines and a line that has been ignored numerous times over the past two years while other's get adjusted. What is so wrong with asking for fixes? All of my points concerning Yamato can be researched and I am sure if you took the time to actually think versus post stupid anime pictures that do nothing to further the conversation, you will see that I am correct.

If you cannot than maybe you should delete your post because it is childish. I went to great lengths to obtain evidence and not just rant so there you have Mister Super Tester... Mister Wargaming schill. Enjoy your time trolling the boards and knocking anyone who makes a cohesive argument for balance. maybe, just for you, I will do one on HE percentages for comparison to show that certain lines are getting needless buffs and attention, at the detriment of others. okay?

Let me know with another of your over simplified, picture heavy, childish replies

i don't test for Wargaming, I was just an Alpha tester, check on your facts before you insult people, also i do not say Wargaming is right about everything look at the Graf Zeppelin, i railled Wargaming hard about the issue and stated quite clearly that they screwed up. The Yamato is still the Queen of tier X BBs, her armor is more than capable of tanking other shells, just don't sail broadside on and look around to angle yourself. Not to mention that she is still the ONLY ship that can lol-pen citadel other tier X BBs from the front (and no, the Conqueror can't do it, her guns are 17.99 inch and therefore too small). Has she had some slight powercreep? Yes. But that started with the German BBs, lowering the citadel didn't change anything really for her. Lowering her citadel would not only make her OP, but is also impossible since it's exactly where it was in real life. A slight buff to the Sigma or the turret traverse? Yes that is o.k (it will need to be tested first). And your idea of her being underpowered? Yah I think not. 

 

 

If your going to insult me, get your facts straight first.

[DeliciousFart]

1 hour ago, Thewavis said:

Here are comparisons to ACTUAL line drawings of an Iowa Class BB from 1951 and the game version. In this you will see that The line drawing shows the citadel box above the waterline, protected by the main belt where as in game, it has been lowered to satisfy "Whiners".

Explain how this is Fair?

Please?

Actual US Navy line drawing showing Citadel box showing above waterline, protected by Main Belt.

Iowa In-Game: Artificially lowered Citadel, was not like this before.

 

Hilarious cherrypicking by the OP here. I know where that picture came from, it's from @Big_Spud's thread discussing the Iowa and Montana citadels.

The very same post also mentioned that at the time, the Iowa, Montana, and Yamato were the only battleships with citadel spaces extending to the deck above the machinery and magazines. In fact, the dark red line shows where the magazines and machinery spaces actually are. Granted, this deck isn't particularly thick at around 12.7 mm STS, which would classify it as a spall deck. However, the Yamato's is even thinner at a puny 9 mm D-steel (i.e. structural steel with none of STS armor properties).

 

D-steel is analogous to HTS, which has yield and tensile strengths some 30% lower than armor grade steels like STS, CNC, or NCA.

[Fog_Repair_Ship_Akashi]

28 minutes ago, Commissar_Carl said:

the citadel extends above the waterline because the Japanese had a different design philosophy compared to the British. 

so I'm sorry, but it isn't that the British BB's have artificially lowered citadels, its that the British design practices in WWI and WWII made for well protected and underwater citadels. 

Probably a side effect of what happened after the Battle of Jutland (certainly influenced Hood's design).