Any reason to use the 420mm on the Kurfurst or no?

[murder_0ne]

Is there ever a reason to use the 420mm guns vs the 406mm guns on the GK? I'm trying to think of one but I can't come up with an advantage. Educate me?

[MidnightPhoenix07]

In theory, yes, but in practice not really. The larger guns have a higher alpha and fire chance per shell, and slightly better pen, whereas the smaller guns have a larger broadside (aka more shells per salvo) and faster reload (more shells per same amount of time). The larger guns don’t get any more significant overmatch potential compared to the smaller guns (the next threshold over 27mm from 386mm guns is the 30mm overmatch that starts at 431mm), so you’re relying on more damage per shell. But with the fact that they have the same sigma and dispersion, more shells per salvo and more shells per minute means more shells hitting (just like the French battleships - they may be shotguns at mid tiers, but if you saturate an area with 16 shells something’s almost guaranteed to hit and stick) and effectively balancing out the higher damage per shell of the larger guns.

[DolphinPrincess]

Higher Penetration, better shell velocity

GK 420 > Montana 406 > GK 406

[PotatoMD]

They make a bigger boom 

[AdmiralThunder]

8 minutes ago, MidnightPhoenix07 said:

In theory, yes, but in practice not really. The larger guns have a higher alpha and fire chance per shell, and slightly better pen, whereas the smaller guns have a larger broadside (aka more shells per salvo) and faster reload (more shells per same amount of time). The larger guns don’t get any more significant overmatch potential compared to the smaller guns (the next threshold over 27mm from 386mm guns is the 30mm overmatch that starts at 431mm), so you’re relying on more damage per shell. But with the fact that they have the same sigma and dispersion, more shells per salvo and more shells per minute means more shells hitting (just like the French battleships - they may be shotguns at mid tiers, but if you saturate an area with 16 shells something’s almost guaranteed to hit and stick) and effectively balancing out the higher damage per shell of the larger guns.

You don't lose guns on GK by using 420's. It's 12 just like 406.

 

[AdmiralThunder]

 

20 minutes ago, murder_0ne said:

Is there ever a reason to use the 420mm guns vs the 406mm guns on the GK? I'm trying to think of one but I can't come up with an advantage. Educate me?

I use them. Little longer reload but they hit harder at all ranges IMO. I don't see the same benefit on FDG so I use 406 there. GK though I do much better with 420.

[murder_0ne]

2 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

You don't lose guns on GK by using 420's. It's 12 just like 406.

 

I was wondering about that when he said that.

[Xcalib3r]

I don't care what anybody said, i have tested both versions extensively, after 450+ battles and i'm sticking with the 420mm for my GK, permanently, they hit hard.

[MidnightPhoenix07]

5 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

You don't lose guns on GK by using 420's. It's 12 just like 406.

 

My bad, could have sworn it was 4x3 for the 406s and 4x2 for the 420s. In that case, it’s more up to player choice if you want faster reload or more shell damage.

[SuperCustodiam]

Compared to FdG, whose, 406s get down to a 22 sec base reload with MBM3, GK only gets down to 25.5 sec base reload with MBM3 with 406s.

Other than that, the potential DPM difference is 13,137 damage (35,8307 vs 34,5170) with MBM3 on both types of guns.

Honestly, 420s are a better deal on GK compared to FdG that just has an insane RoF with her 406s that work better for her compared to the 420s since FdG has only 4x2 guns compared to GKs 4x3, so you're throwing out more shells every broadside compared to FdG.

[AdmiralThunder]

1 minute ago, MidnightPhoenix07 said:

My bad, could have sworn it was 4x3 for the 406s and 4x2 for the 420s. In that case, it’s more up to player choice if you want faster reload or more shell damage.

[AlcatrazNC]

Yamato gun sounds