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

I'd like to see another historically-accurate Kaiserreich BB/BC

16 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,503
[KNMSU]
Members
5,287 posts
5,531 battles

To get straight to the point: while I like playing German BBs (particularly low tier ones), I generally hate how they look. The only refit, visually, that agrees with me is Bayern's hypothetical Weimar-era Deutschland knockoff:

rwZVsy9.jpg

6bJGV54.jpg

And that's only because it looks sort of plausible (and I always loved that silly gigantic bridge). It's still no excuse for a ship that should look like this:

b1643375.jpg

But, overall, the "rebuilds" for Kaiser and Konig hover somewhere in that unfortunate no-man's land between impractical and impossible. And, to be honest, they're just plain ugly. The hallmark of German battleships and battlecruisers of the First World War were low profiles, minimalist superstructures, and very prominent funnels. 

1iNx9iZ.jpg

AMQ5jc9.jpg

Meanwhile, we got shafted with these abominations in their place:

t3NCTEs.jpg

AK8IL0i.jpg

The truly sad thing about it is that the British BB tree doesn't really suffer this problem. Sure, HMS Orion has some secondaries added, and Iron Duke is short a funnel (for reasons that escape me - why would her "refit" just be to replace two funnels with one?), but these vessels are fairly closely aligned to their real-life counterparts.

Since WG obviously isn't going to rectify this issue in the tech-tree, it would be nice to see some down-tiered "on the cheap" premiums with true-to-life Imperial German lines - both a SMS Baden (with the stock Bayern hull) and SMS Kronprinz would probably work well (though I am a little bit hesitant on nudging a 15" battleship, regardless of how derpy the dispersion would be, into tier 5). 

Anyway, I just think it's a shame that we can't get more good-looking ships like Konig Albert. I'd play mine more, but its range and turret traverse don't agree with me.

KonigAlbert6.jpg

Still, that should be the benchmark... not make-believe turds like the Kaiser. 

Edited by Battlecruiser_NewZealand
  • Cool 4
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,917 posts
8,387 battles

Great post thank you. +1

If you haven't seen my pre-dreadnought thread (and some battlecruisers and dreadnoughts) do drop in and vote:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,026
[SALVO]
Members
19,958 posts
19,909 battles

@Battlecruiser_NewZealand

While you're not necessarily wrong about how the T4 and T5's look (and of course, it's your opinion and you have every right to it), I think that you'd be delusional to expect that if history was different and those ships were never scuttled or whatever post WW1 that after whatever refits they'd have had that they would have retained a low profile.

Now, arguably, this is more relevant to the T5 Konig than the T4 Kaiser, since T4's don't usually get anything close to a WW2 grade refit, but the  T5 would.  And as such, it would definitely get a much more built up superstructure.  Any BB that saw action in WW2 would have had a much taller superstructure to support much more highly positioned range finders, etc.  That's just the way it is.

I think that I've said before that it's kind of a shame that there weren't two versions of WoWS.  One for WW1 and one for WW2, because this would have allowed WW1 era ships to be portrayed in a more historically accurate manner, with their generally lower profiles, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,068
[LEGIO]
Members
3,243 posts
5,999 battles

Perhaps the answer would be for battleships to have "classic" hulls available which lack the enhanced AA armament of any real or fictional refits but possess the same health and maneuverability.

There are a few problems however, such as the French BB tree with their questionable refits of the Normandie and Lyon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,503
[KNMSU]
Members
5,287 posts
5,531 battles
1 hour ago, Crucis said:

@Battlecruiser_NewZealand

While you're not necessarily wrong about how the T4 and T5's look (and of course, it's your opinion and you have every right to it), I think that you'd be delusional to expect that if history was different and those ships were never scuttled or whatever post WW1 that after whatever refits they'd have had that they would have retained a low profile.

Now, arguably, this is more relevant to the T5 Konig than the T4 Kaiser, since T4's don't usually get anything close to a WW2 grade refit, but the  T5 would.  And as such, it would definitely get a much more built up superstructure.  Any BB that saw action in WW2 would have had a much taller superstructure to support much more highly positioned range finders, etc.  That's just the way it is.

I think that I've said before that it's kind of a shame that there weren't two versions of WoWS.  One for WW1 and one for WW2, because this would have allowed WW1 era ships to be portrayed in a more historically accurate manner, with their generally lower profiles, etc.

I don't think either vessel would have been retained had Germany won WWI (or fought to some kind of draw). Both Kaiser and Konig only had 12" guns - they were well armored, but I don't believe it would have been worth the capital to upgrade their speed/hardware in a world where 16" ordinance was the standard by 1919 (and three of the remaining naval powers had plans for 18+ inch armed ships). Quite simply, no matter how excellent the protection and internal subdivision of the early German BBs was, it wasn't going to matter if the guns couldn't do anything against the competition. They would not have been upgraded - I think the earliest units to be retained would have been the Bayerns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,026
[SALVO]
Members
19,958 posts
19,909 battles
4 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_NewZealand said:

I don't think either vessel would have been retained had Germany won WWI (or fought to some kind of draw). Both Kaiser and Konig only had 12" guns - they were well armored, but I don't believe it would have been worth the capital to upgrade their speed/hardware in a world where 16" ordinance was the standard by 1919 (and three of the remaining naval powers had plans for 18+ inch armed ships). Quite simply, no matter how excellent the protection and internal subdivision of the early German BBs was, it wasn't going to matter if the guns couldn't do anything against the competition. They would not have been upgraded - I think the earliest units to be retained would have been the Bayerns.

That may be entirely true.  But this is still a game, and they can't just leave the Konig in its WW1 state and expect it to be competitive.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,503
[KNMSU]
Members
5,287 posts
5,531 battles
32 minutes ago, Crucis said:

That may be entirely true.  But this is still a game, and they can't just leave the Konig in its WW1 state and expect it to be competitive.  

Well... it doesn't have to look like it does, either. Orion doesn't have any bizarro superstructure, and until she was nerfed, she was the most powerful (tech tree) ship in the tier. 

But, as I said in the OP, I'm not looking for changes - just the chance to buy knock-off, down-tiered premiums. Or, hell, just give me some German battlecruisers. How about a tier 4 Seydlitz premium? Just put Moltke in the eventual tree.

5f381930bc4096aa1feca1eedfc53387.jpg

Edited by Battlecruiser_NewZealand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,026
[SALVO]
Members
19,958 posts
19,909 battles
16 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_NewZealand said:

Well... it doesn't have to look like it does, either. Orion doesn't have any bizarro superstructure, and until she was nerfed, she was the most powerful (tech tree) ship in the tier. 

But, as I said in the OP, I'm not looking for changes - just the chance to buy knock-off, down-tiered premiums. Or, hell, just give me some German battlecruisers. How about a tier 4 Seydlitz premium? Just put Moltke in the eventual tree.

I wouldn't expect much.  They don't seem to be in any rush to get A) battlecruisers into the game, and B) develop many low tier premiums (when there's more money to be made on higher tier ones).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,201
[SALT]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
3,660 posts
2,989 battles
1 hour ago, Battlecruiser_NewZealand said:

I don't think either vessel would have been retained had Germany won WWI (or fought to some kind of draw). Both Kaiser and Konig only had 12" guns - they were well armored, but I don't believe it would have been worth the capital to upgrade their speed/hardware in a world where 16" ordinance was the standard by 1919 (and three of the remaining naval powers had plans for 18+ inch armed ships). Quite simply, no matter how excellent the protection and internal subdivision of the early German BBs was, it wasn't going to matter if the guns couldn't do anything against the competition. They would not have been upgraded - I think the earliest units to be retained would have been the Bayerns.

Something that I've talked with a few others about is that Konig actually could have had another upgrade that isn't spoken upon much. The new 35cm SK/L 45 two gun mounts had the same width roller path as the Konig's 30.5cm guns. Now, they did weigh more which means that the ship would need to have it's beam increased to still retain 5 turrets, but all of the older ships with the 30.5cm guns could have been upgunned to 35cm guns. A lot of this had to do with slight redesigning of the turret system to use a smaller barbette while maintaining a 2.5rpm rate of fire at a 20 degree elevation. This is why the Mackensen's weight increase wasn't that steep compared to Derfflinger.

Now, as for the whole 16'' being the standard, not entirely so as even in a best case scenario Germany is still extreme cost strapped after the war. Upgunning the Konig's with the same guns as Mackensen which are just slightly smaller than 14'' lets them retain the same hulls for far cheaper when in reality the 35cm guns were on par with other nations 14'' guns such as Japan and the USA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
372
[RKN]
Beta Testers
1,100 posts
9,864 battles

When the game was new and the A hull was the WWI configuration of the ship, I thought it would have been fun to have a mode where you fought with those hulls. Alas, they got ride of the A Hulls and have turned them into premiums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,503
[KNMSU]
Members
5,287 posts
5,531 battles
1 hour ago, SavageTactical said:

When the game was new and the A hull was the WWI configuration of the ship, I thought it would have been fun to have a mode where you fought with those hulls. Alas, they got ride of the A Hulls and have turned them into premiums.

Most of the German BBs never had A hulls. Bayern is the exception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
234
[SFOR]
Members
973 posts
6,958 battles

I have similar issues about the Normandie and the Lyon.

So they give only one chimney to represent the engine upgrade. ok 

But if that is the case why the turret B on the Normandie doens't do a 360 turn?

What are those big cranes doing in  the Lyon? Doesn't make any sense.

121704FranceNormandieClass19171919Study1.png

323840FranceLyonClassAsDesigned19133.png

Edited by _no_one_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,503
[KNMSU]
Members
5,287 posts
5,531 battles
18 minutes ago, _no_one_ said:

I have similar issues about the Normandie and the Lyon.

So they give only one chimney to represent the engine upgrade. ok 

But if that is the case why the turret B on the Normandie doens't do a 360 turn?

What are those big cranes doing in  the Lyon? Doesn't make any sense.

121704FranceNormandieClass19171919Study1.png

323840FranceLyonClassAsDesigned19133.png

The problem with Normandie is that she's been extended, too. So not only does she run with a never-was (never-would-be? - everything about those massive, wing-mounted secondary turrets says NOPE to me) refit, but she's not even the same ship as would have been built - she's something like 50+ feet longer than the real hull. As I have stated elsewhere, any "reconstruction" involving the lengthening of a WWI-era dreadnought from the mid-hull is a ludicrous proposition (this isn't a cruise ship or bulk container vessel you can just slice in two and plop a new section between) - due to hullform angling, it would have cost just as much to build a new ship from scratch. So even if Normandie received a "stock" fit, she'd still be incorrectly proportioned. 

Edited by Battlecruiser_NewZealand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
234
[SFOR]
Members
973 posts
6,958 battles
11 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_NewZealand said:

The problem with Normandie is that she's been extended, too. So not only does she run with a never-was (never-would-be? - everything about those massive, wing-mounted secondary turrets says NOPE to me) refit, but she's not even the same ship as would have been built - she's something like 50+ feet longer than the real hull. As I have stated elsewhere, any "reconstruction" involving the lengthening of a WWI-era dreadnought from the mid-hull is a ludicrous proposition (this isn't a cruise ship or bulk container vessel you can just slice in two and plop a new section between) - due to hullform angling, it would have cost just as much to build a new ship from scratch. So even if Normandie received a "stock" fit, she'd still be incorrectly proportioned. 

She is extended to reflect the changes they made to the hull in the Béarn carrier. 

It was a Normandie class battleship thats was convert to a carrier. Now those wing mounted secondary i agree they sounds a little too much, the same thing applies to that massive cunning tower in the Lyon.

720349FranceCVBearn19392.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
934
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
1,332 posts
9,086 battles

I would love to see a German battlecruiser. Way too many paperships in this game lately, lets get some real ones for a change. Austro-Hungarian BB too. I've also wondered what WGs obsession is with deleting funnels on their "rebuilds". There's still the same amount of boilers in these ships, how are they trunking it all to one forward funnel? 

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.

×