Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
SkaerKrow

Enterprise vs. The British Invasion

13 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[SIM] SkaerKrow 732
1,793 posts
3,101 battles

So, we have a second chance at the Enterprise. The first time around, the ship was largely regarded as mediocre, with a gimmick that was strong against German BBs. With the arrival and large population of British battlewagons in the game now, has the Enterprise's stock gone up at all? I've read that the Nelson's armor scheme is effective against US AP bombs, but is this true of the other high-tier UK BBs? Is it a good time to join the continuing mission? Or is the Grey Ghost still just a cold spot?

 

Live long and prosper. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PLPT] SyndicatedINC 450
1,438 posts
7,787 battles

Mine had better luck actually damaging the RN BBs than the german ones.  However the key word there is luck.  When it comes to AP bombs versus the german BBs I have had none (9 hits on a Gneisnau for 1k damage type bad luck).  However I have had above average luck versus IJN and USN at least compared to what others report (dev struck the first Iowa I went after first game in the ship).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OO7] _V12 537
1,268 posts
4,891 battles

Enterprise was, and still is a god.  Also known as "better Shoukaku".  The only thing it's bad at is taking out DDs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAE] BlailBlerg 256
1,459 posts
1,812 battles

did the English really have turtleback armor?  Did the IJN and USN really have armor that did not protect as well?  

Should the decreased range in the game mean that armor mechanics should be looked at?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HELLS] GrandAdmiral_2016 236
1,256 posts
11,102 battles
1 hour ago, BlailBlerg said:

did the English really have turtleback armor?  Did the IJN and USN really have armor that did not protect as well?  

Should the decreased range in the game mean that armor mechanics should be looked at?

The Brits had horizontal deck armor from KGV, not turtlebacks. It was integrated with the side armor and the upper decks were NC steel designed to trigger the fuses on AP before it hit the main deck armor. Nelson and Rodney, with their internal sloped armor like Hood, had some of it, but it had weak spots bow and stern that allowed shells to get inside the citadel from dead ahead and dead astern because it did not go far enough forward or aft in the all or nothing scheme used on those ships. This was recognized before they entered service but did not get fixed in Nelson until 1940-41, and was never fixed in Rodney because she was diverted while on a trip to a US shipyard for reconstruction under Lend-Lease to fight Bismarck and never got the armor fix or the engine and hull repairs  she needed. during the war and was sidelined to reserve before the end of 1944 due to her poor condition. The KGV had the best armor scheme of any allied treaty battleship and the best quality armor plate, as tested by the USN at the Dahlgren proving range mid-war. The  RM Littorios had an armor  arrangement superior to just about everybody in the world-layered armor for horizontal and vertical protection and the Pugliese torpedo protection system. This did not save Roma from two heavyweight guided bombs. What is in the game does not reflect real life. Balance, Comerade!

Edited by GrandAdmiral_2016
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members, Beta Testers
3,416 posts
8,750 battles

i nuked a kgv in my ent the other day with ap bombs.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SIM] SkaerKrow 732
1,793 posts
3,101 battles
2 hours ago, GrandAdmiral_2016 said:

The Brits had horizontal deck armor from KGV, not turtlebacks. It was integrated with the side armor and the upper decks were NC steel designed to trigger the fuses on AP before it hit the main deck armor. Nelson and Rodney, with their internal sloped armor like Hood, had some of it, but it had weak spots bow and stern that allowed shells to get inside the citadel from dead ahead and dead astern because it did not go far enough forward or aft in the all or nothing scheme used on those ships. This was recognized before they entered service but did not get fixed in Nelson until 1940-41, and was never fixed in Rodney because she was diverted while on a trip to a US shipyard for reconstruction under Lend-Lease to fight Bismarck and never got the armor fix or the engine and hull repairs  she needed. during the war and was sidelined to reserve before the end of 1944 due to her poor condition. The KGV had the best armor scheme of any allied treaty battleship and the best quality armor plate, as tested by the USN at the Dahlgren proving range mid-war. The  RM Littorios had an armor  arrangement superior to just about everybody in the world-layered armor for horizontal and vertical protection and the Pugliese torpedo protection system. This did not save Roma from two heavyweight guided bombs. What is in the game does not reflect real life. Balance, Comerade!

Hey, thanks for the lesson Admiral :Smile_honoring:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAE] BlailBlerg 256
1,459 posts
1,812 battles

so, really, they shouldn't get turtleback armor then.  

 

I don't know why they decided they needed that crazy armor on top of all the other perks. Actually, I'm not sure the Germans really shoulda had it either, though it makes more sense, they want to get stupid close gameplay wise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HELLS] GrandAdmiral_2016 236
1,256 posts
11,102 battles
19 minutes ago, BlailBlerg said:

so, really, they shouldn't get turtleback armor then.  

 

I don't know why they decided they needed that crazy armor on top of all the other perks. Actually, I'm not sure the Germans really shoulda had it either, though it makes more sense, they want to get stupid close gameplay wise. 

What armor! The RN ship have good heal/repair party, but their armor stinks! I include the premiums in that statement because I have both! The entire line has a split playstyle that reflects what they were designed to do when first built and they play well at low tiers, but the whole idea swings around and make heavy cruisers out of the line starting at T6, and increasingly so from T7 up. I'll play them, but not as much as I would like to. The national flavor WG/WoWs has built into the line is not my cup of tea! The rum ration, on the other hand...Pipe ''Up Spirits'', Buffer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
446 posts
1,035 battles

I found out first hand that Lexingtons 1000 lb bombs do a lot of damage to RN BBs, at least my Monarch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[90THE] Hurlbut 171
2,605 posts
1,678 battles
1 hour ago, Prkl8r said:

I found out first hand that Lexingtons 1000 lb bombs do a lot of damage to RN BBs, at least my Monarch.

Yeah...you'll love the dive bombers from Saipan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,975 posts
3,899 battles
11 hours ago, SkaerKrow said:

I've read that the Nelson's armor scheme is effective against US AP bombs, but is this true of the other high-tier UK BBs? Is

The problem isn't that the AP bombs shouldn't work.

 

It's that WG fail-armoring decks so they are thicker than they should be historically due to pure laziness makes the AP bombs not as effective as they could be.

 

For example, Nelsons should be fearing the Hand of God from on high in terms of AP bombs. In Game? Well it benefits from having an extra 12.5mm thick top deck which makes it nearly immune to getting Citadeled to [edited] like German BBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×