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

Bismarck v Tirpitz

Which is better for aggressive play  

58 members have voted

  1. 1. Which is better for aggressive play

    • Bismarck
      15
    • Tirpitz
      42

26 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,499
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
3,810 posts

I can't decide between the two.  As an aggressive player, which one should I focus on, and why?  I've had Tirpitz forever, but now I think I might be leaning back towards Bismarck due to the Hydro.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
680
[MIA-A]
Members
1,981 posts
6,579 battles
1 minute ago, skull_122_steel said:

I say tirpitz because of the torpedos are better for aggressive play then hydro

 

... really?

 

Those torps are only beneficial later game whereas hydro lets you have minutes of "I'm really hard to torp" while you're pushing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
974 posts
1,871 battles
4 minutes ago, enderland07 said:

 

... really?

 

Those torps are only beneficial later game whereas hydro lets you have minutes of "I'm really hard to torp" while you're pushing.

well I would take if I had either of them the alternative to the concealment mod that gives bonus torpedo detectability range pretty much giving you hydro all the time and I always drive directly towards the enemy so torps would be more useful

Edited by skull_122_steel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,499
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
3,810 posts
3 minutes ago, enderland07 said:

which one do you do better in?

Hard to say.   Been so long since I played Bismarck regularly.  Just starting to try her out again.

 

Is it true Tirpitz has slightly better armor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
974 posts
1,871 battles
Just now, TheDreadnought said:

Hard to say.   Been so long since I played Bismarck regularly.  Just starting to try her out again.

 

Is it true Tirpitz has slightly better armor?

nope the bis has the 1mm extra belt armor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,499
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
3,810 posts
4 minutes ago, skull_122_steel said:

nope the bis has the 1mm extra belt armor.

1mm?  That doesn't seem like it would be enough to make any difference at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,375
[-K-]
Members
5,097 posts
8,970 battles

If we were talking pre-nerf hydro, I'd give Bismarck the vote.  But with Tirpitz getting a secondary range buff (plus torpedoes) and Bismarck being knocked down a peg, I'd say they are close to even.  Might still give a slight edge to Tirpitz as those torpedoes can bail you out of some situations where you have foes on both sides that the guns can't handle alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,032
[DAKI]
WoWS Wiki Editor
7,227 posts
6,433 battles
28 minutes ago, skull_122_steel said:

nope the bis has the 1mm extra belt armor.

Actually it's 5mm

320mm vs 315mm

 

as for OP, the Tirpitz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
782
[MIA-I]
[MIA-I]
Supertester
2,713 posts
4,699 battles

Tirpitz for the torps.  Late game aggressive pushes against enemy BB's those torps do come in handy.  Tirpitz to me at least always had the edge over the Bismarck after they did the secondary buff to her.  Hydro is nice and all, but with some map awareness and Priority Target I find myself "reasonably" comfortable torp dodging without it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,036
[WUDPS]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
4,741 posts
4,540 battles

It's nice when you torp someone and they say "super F'ing nazi torpedoes".

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
371
Members
2,274 posts
7,369 battles

Tirpitz, because of torps.

 

Even if you dont launch them the fact that you have them make many players panic when you are close. They panic and show a flat broadside for you and your team. Tirpitz has a "fear aura" at close ranges that Bismarck dont have. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,459 posts
12,213 battles
51 minutes ago, TheDreadnought said:

I can't decide between the two.  As an aggressive player, which one should I focus on, and why?  I've had Tirpitz forever, but now I think I might be leaning back towards Bismarck due to the Hydro.

the Derpitz baby! A regular one man band!

Image result for one man band

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13
[AK]
Members
95 posts
7,541 battles

I agree, Tirpitz because of the torps. I have recently acquired both, and the Tirpitz is by far the better ship for me. Nothing more fun than going in between two ships, and torping them both to oblivion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,036
[WUDPS]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
4,741 posts
4,540 battles

The issue I do find with the tirpitz, those torps are very prone to being destroyed from fire spammers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,622
[E-E]
[E-E]
Members
15,667 posts
14,042 battles

I own both.

 

Aggressive play?

 

BISMARCK

 

You have Hydro to help in your push.  It's not as useful in detecting a DD because it's not the 5.8km German Hydro, but it is still very helpful in detecting torpedoes.

 

Secondly, the AA on Bismarck is FAR better than Tirpitz.  The latter's AA is so bad that Tier VI planes have no concern about Tirpitz Tier VIII low quality AA.

 

Tirpitz torpedoes are so rarely used.  This isn't like when she first came out and people were surprised she had torpedoes.  Not to mention High Tier Meta is not conducive for Torpedo BB use.  Hell, German BB Secondary Builds with 11.3-11.6km ranges have trouble finding their place for a while, so 6km torpedoes on a s--t concealment BB isn't exactly useful on a regular basis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,717
[HINON]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
8,856 posts
3,680 battles
1 hour ago, TheDreadnought said:

Hard to say.   Been so long since I played Bismarck regularly.  Just starting to try her out again.

 

Is it true Tirpitz has slightly better armor?

 

1 hour ago, skull_122_steel said:

nope the bis has the 1mm extra belt armor.

 

Historically, yes, Tirpitz had better armor. In-game, not so much.

 

Bismarck (320) has 5mm more belt armor than Tirpitz (315), not 1mm. This is historical. In trade for this, Tirpitz has 5mm more deck armor.

 

So I guess in the end Tirpitz does have better armor than Bismarck because you're not going to get to a Tirpitz citadel just because she has 5mm less belt armor, its impenetrable either way. However, you can citadel a Bismarck-class through the deck, so having 5mm extra is a bit of a boost.

 

Anyways, WG got Tirpitz's armor wrong in-game anyways. They made her entire upper deck 50mm when it should have been 80mm over the magazines. But I digress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
554
[CVA16]
Members
2,750 posts
6,251 battles

Tirpitz on the torpedo fear factor. I actually am better with the Bismarck but to answer the aggressive part that's what I feel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,092
[SIM]
Members
2,451 posts
4,080 battles

Bismarck, hands down. What would you rather have? Ample warning against torpedoes and aggressive DDs, or torpedoes that you’ll be able to meme at careless BB players from time to time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,622
[E-E]
[E-E]
Members
15,667 posts
14,042 battles

I remember hilariously flying my Ryujo's Tier VI planes back and forth over a Tirpitz and having zero fear of her AA, just to rub it in the user's face :cap_cool:

 

Bismarck can wear down Kaga's Tier VI TB strike so it hurts less.  Tirpitz's AA is so bad that it will have zero effect and Kaga will hit with essentially Max Power on her.

 

Wait until Tech Tree USN CVs get their AP bombs that are larger than Enterprise's.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,493
[GREPT]
[GREPT]
Beta Testers
6,739 posts
7,095 battles

I am voting tirpitz purely because you didn't include a both option. They both have their upsides for duking it out at close range, tirpz has the torps and bismark has hydo making it safer to duke it out with cruisers and DDs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,869
[CNO]
[CNO]
Members
3,784 posts
12,916 battles

Personally, I believe hydro is better.  Others have noted it, but it's worth repeating.  Tirp torps aren't very useful in the early game against anyone worth their salt.  Push into a cap early "hoping"  to find someone to torp is ludicrous.  Hydro, on the other hand is immediately useful on an early push into potentially DD infested waters.  It both helps detect the torps early enough to avoid them and at the same time poses a significant threat to any DDs that decide to stick around in their smoke.  Combine this with those secondaries and you can actually wipe a DD that can't see you!!!  So if you like to be aggressive early in the fight, Biz is the only way to go.

 

Tirp torps can be more useful in some situations, but those situations are..well...situational.

 

If I'm up against a Biz in the end game, I'll take a Tirp.  When I'm up against the unknown in the early game, I'll take a Biz.    

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
695
[DRACS]
Members
3,360 posts

Both are very aggressive.

 

Bismarck is better at dealing with DDs and pushing caps.

Tirpitz is better at dealing with other battleships.

So take your pick based on which you prefer. 

 

That being said, Tirpitz is a premium and hence will offer better credit rewards, plus it has the ability to use any german captain rather than have one dedicated to itself like the Bismarck. So if your best captain is on the FdG or GK, then play the Tirpitz.

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.

×