Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Ch0min

American 2nd Battleship tech tree Size comparison

20 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

361
[-VT-]
Members
855 posts
25,364 battles

I always thought the UU for the Yamato should have been the Wave Motion Gun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
521
[GRAVE]
Members
1,256 posts
18,709 battles

That might actually make Kansas and Minnesota the smallest BBS at their tier by quite a margin.

Also never realized how small Yamato is compared to the other T10 BBs

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
702
[SOV]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,868 posts
8,476 battles

So the tier 8 & 9 are basically a New Mexico on steroids? I can dig it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32,429
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
24,086 posts
18,898 battles

When the heaviest battleship ever built is the smallest at tier. Also, Kansas and Minnesota look like compact little bruisers.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,130
[ARS]
Beta Testers
4,626 posts
4,984 battles
5 minutes ago, Lert said:

When the heaviest battleship ever built is the smallest at tier. Also, Kansas and Minnesota look like compact little bruisers.

Well, it is a lot easier to put a pipe dream onto paper than it is to find the money in the treasury to actually build it.

(Though I would note that Yamato is not the lightest of the ships there)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,884
[SYN]
Members
15,855 posts
12,803 battles

You can trace the modern Japanese compact car lineage back to Yamato.

 

Jokes aside, when you go as compact as Yamato, you also get that exceptionally weak octagonal citadel in WoWs.

Where as 1930-ish and onwards USN designs feature a lot of redundancy in their citadel designs that don't show up as features in WoWs.
Features like fully separated engine compartments that prevents all of them being flooded and failing at once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33
[TOG]
[TOG]
Members
43 posts
4,242 battles

the American BB Split is a joke. They should have made the Iowa tier 10 and then used the rest of the IOWA BB'S. DON"T USE PAPER SHIPS 

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,130
[ARS]
Beta Testers
4,626 posts
4,984 battles
14 minutes ago, Caboose_1972 said:

the American BB Split is a joke. They should have made the Iowa tier 10 and then used the rest of the IOWA BB'S. DON"T USE PAPER SHIPS 

 

Multiple tiers of Iowa class BBs?  That is ridiculous.

And it isn't like the US doesn't have paper ships already in their lines, including the original BB line.

Now, I really would have liked to have seen Nevada at Tier V, Pennsylvania at Tier VI and Tennessee at Tier VII as part of this line, but South Dakota (1920) at Tier VIII is fine as are the Tillman concepts at IX and X.

Keep in mind that the South Dakota (1920) is more real than Montana as Montana was never laid down and the South Dakota (1920)s were, South Dakota (1920) reaching 35% complete before being canceled and scrapped on the blocks due to the Washington Naval Treaty.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
463 posts
4,350 battles
2 hours ago, vikingno2 said:

you would think they would up the HP on the Kurfurst

 

GK does not need more health, it needs better armor. Horizontal armor is rather weak ensuring lots of penetration hits and the king size superstructure makes HE spam a nightmare to deal with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33
[TOG]
[TOG]
Members
43 posts
4,242 battles
34 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

Multiple tiers of Iowa class BBs?  That is ridiculous.

And it isn't like the US doesn't have paper ships already in their lines, including the original BB line.

Now, I really would have liked to have seen Nevada at Tier V, Pennsylvania at Tier VI and Tennessee at Tier VII as part of this line, but South Dakota (1920) at Tier VIII is fine as are the Tillman concepts at IX and X.

Keep in mind that the South Dakota (1920) is more real than Montana as Montana was never laid down and the South Dakota (1920)s were, South Dakota (1920) reaching 35% complete before being canceled and scrapped on the blocks due to the Washington Naval Treaty.

so instead of having brawler style ships we get a group of paper slow camping ships it's [edited] WG is ruining the game with the Russian BIAS 

  • Boring 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,130
[ARS]
Beta Testers
4,626 posts
4,984 battles
3 minutes ago, Caboose_1972 said:

so instead of having brawler style ships we get a group of paper slow camping ships it's [edited] WG is ruining the game with the Russian BIAS 

You were never going to get good brawlers out of an Iowa hull.  There is a reason Georgia sucks at it compared to Massachusetts.

A brawling line would also be paper at the high tiers.  Nations simply didn't build enough of the BBs designed at the end of the battleship era.  Consider that of the Tier IX and X BBs only two (three if you count the tier bumped Richelieu class Jean Bart) existed, Iowa and Yamato.  Every other one is either pure paper or was never completed after being laid down.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
361
[-VT-]
Members
855 posts
25,364 battles
1 hour ago, pepe_trueno said:

GK does not need more health, it needs better armor. Horizontal armor is rather weak ensuring lots of penetration hits and the king size superstructure makes HE spam a nightmare to deal with.

just a simple comparison to the Kremlin but ok armor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33
[TOG]
[TOG]
Members
43 posts
4,242 battles
1 hour ago, Helstrem said:

You were never going to get good brawlers out of an Iowa hull.  There is a reason Georgia sucks at it compared to Massachusetts.

A brawling line would also be paper at the high tiers.  Nations simply didn't build enough of the BBs designed at the end of the battleship era.  Consider that of the Tier IX and X BBs only two (three if you count the tier bumped Richelieu class Jean Bart) existed, Iowa and Yamato.  Every other one is either pure paper or was never completed after being laid down.

That may be so but the Iowa class bb were faster and more accurate than say Montana 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,130
[ARS]
Beta Testers
4,626 posts
4,984 battles
5 minutes ago, Caboose_1972 said:

That may be so but the Iowa class bb were faster and more accurate than say Montana 

That is an odd claim.  What would make the Iowas more accurate than the class that was to have followed them?  Why do you think poorer fire control would have been installed on the Montanas?

Edited by Helstrem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,168
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
7,882 posts
11,554 battles

how ironic that the Vermont, which is a small state, basically matches the Montana, huge state, in ship size

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,039 posts
4,347 battles

DAMN BOI, THEY THICCCCCC

On a more serious note, however, I am impressed by how small the Tier VIII and IX are. 

-Shrayes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
503
[BOTO]
Members
1,258 posts
15,339 battles
15 hours ago, Caboose_1972 said:

That may be so but the Iowa class bb were faster and more accurate than say Montana 

Faster, yes, they were deliberately designed that way. More accurate?  That doesn't make any sense as they had the same guns and, if anything, the Montana's would be more accurate because of possible advances in FC radar before they were commissioned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×