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

Dry Dock: World War II Navies Compared

24 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

7,883
[WG]
Administrator, Developers, Community Department, WG Staff, In AlfaTesters
4,576 posts
15,087 battles

Learn about the strengths and weaknesses of the warring nations’ navies!


Read it on the portal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
121
[CUDA]
Members
286 posts
8,014 battles

I'd be curious to know how they decided what ships to include. If the German submarines are included so too should British vessels used to oppose those subs, including the Flower class (200 ships, 1000 tons all built 40-42) and the numerous trawlers (500-1000 tons, over 400 used during the war, most at the start). Americans had thousands of patrol craft and submarine chasers 300-1000 tons used primarily for ASW activities.

  • Cool 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,514
[ALL41]
Beta Testers
2,407 posts
10,647 battles

USSR: Vodka overdose induced fantasy navy

Science Versus Fiction: SETI's Seth Shostak on Battleship | WIRED

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
121
[MUG-T]
Members
350 posts
3,840 battles
1 hour ago, Skyfaller said:

USSR: Vodka overdose induced fantasy navy

Science Versus Fiction: SETI's Seth Shostak on Battleship | WIRED

Missouri: I'm gonna stop you right thereUnknown-29.jpeg.dd7c4e75c004ccf6ee982c3a8aa17b00.jpeg

*weeb noises*

  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
554
[CAAT]
Members
1,030 posts
4,625 battles
6 hours ago, Skyfaller said:

USSR: Vodka overdose induced fantasy navy

Science Versus Fiction: SETI's Seth Shostak on Battleship | WIRED

Speaking of fantasy ships...This is how fast Thunderer fires HE from 20km out with MBM3:

Battleship GIF on GIFER - by Buriri

(exaggerated, of course. Shush.)

Edited by SaiIor_Moon
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
974
[4HIM]
Beta Testers
2,255 posts
16,116 battles

The video was a good effort, but comparing straight up numbers is not a good way to compare navies.  Britain's main strength seemed to be her BBs, but in reality it was her CVs, though smaller in aircraft complement than US or Japanese, made a huge difference in the Atlantic and Med. war.  Those few CVs had a huge impact in area denial, killing subs, destroying BBs, raiding ports, than all her BBs combined.  Geography plays a huge role as well.  Britain's many airbases like Gibralter, Malta, England herself, made land based air decisive in those areas.  Granted, where Germany could use her air, her forces scored victories... Italy to a much lesser degree.  

Numbers are nice, but unless those numbers can be projected, and they are the right ship for the job, then they lose their potency.   The Vid did do a great job of showing that though the UBoat was an effective weapon, the sheer industrial strength of the US and allies, decided the battle of the Atlantic as soon as the US became a combatant.  Add in the tech superiority at sea, with longer range planes etc and the UBoats days were numbered.  By the end of the war Uboats were being sunk on almost a 1v1 basis as merchant ships...ouch.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
735
[MR-1]
Members
1,797 posts
22,295 battles

good history lesson for the younger ones who play WOW  but i suspect the teens are more likely to be playing mindcraft and fortnight 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,047
[WPORT]
Members
8,118 posts
13,166 battles
10 hours ago, Hapa_Fodder said:

Learn about the strengths and weaknesses of the warring nations’ navies!


Read it on the portal

A good video/episode.  Well done.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34
[WARGS]
Members
28 posts
24,868 battles

Cool Video.. Funny at the end where it talks about how these ships are in the game. While many are, there are also many deserving ships that are not, (USS NEVADA, HMS REPULSE, HMS INVINCABLE, to name a few) while we have a plethora of souped up paper ships that never made it past the design stage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,362
[PVE]
Members
7,873 posts
23,833 battles

They always seem to get the date of Russia's intro into the war wrong...stating it as the date Germany betrayed their alliance & attacked them & omitting mention of the alliance & their actual inclusion in WWII at the start of that alliance.

Note: Just because a piece of signed paper only has the words "Anti Aggression Pact" in it's title doesn't cancel out the fact that when 2 powers (Russia & Germany) simultaneously attack a 3rd power (Poland...w/complete details on how to divvy it up beforehand...not just 2 powers coincidentally attacking at the same time w/no regard to each other at all) that it's actually an alliance.

  • Cool 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10
[TMP]
Members
24 posts
3,557 battles

By the end of the war the United States Navy had more combat ships in service than every other navy on Earth, combined.    Like comrade Jughashvili commented, "quantity has a quality all its own".   And these weren't exactly 2nd rate combatants by any means....  

Edited by Ohiro1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31
[NGA-B]
Alpha Tester
449 posts
11,170 battles

The video was not clear as to weather the British numbers include the Commonwealth.  By the end of WW2  Canada had the 2nd biggest navy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31
[NGA-B]
Alpha Tester
449 posts
11,170 battles
16 hours ago, The_Big_Woof said:

Cool Video.. Funny at the end where it talks about how these ships are in the game. While many are, there are also many deserving ships that are not, (USS NEVADA, HMS REPULSE, HMS INVINCABLE, to name a few) while we have a plethora of souped up paper ships that never made it past the design stage

Well we have Oklahoma, Nevada's sister.     Battlecruisers are a problem for WOWS whole tier/class construct.  Was a topic back in the day that adding a battlecruiser class would adversely impact matchmaking.  Might be time to revisit that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
142
[UTWE]
Members
399 posts
7,578 battles
42 minutes ago, kayjay said:

The video was not clear as to weather the British numbers include the Commonwealth.  By the end of WW2  Canada had the 2nd biggest navy.

Yeah I don't know why they kept talking about the Soviet Navy like it was the third best Allied navy of WW2 when it was a complete joke. The third navy should have been Australia or Canada. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
813
[-BCO-]
Members
1,835 posts
3,390 battles
19 hours ago, Admiral_Kartoffel said:

The dialogue of the video is just a wee bit misleading.

Lolz. Just a bit?? I know, Iknow RN humor......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
813
[-BCO-]
Members
1,835 posts
3,390 battles
19 hours ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

A good video/episode.  Well done.

Yes. I mean... no. In that order. It is called alt (HI)Storytelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1
[F-N-S]
Members
1 post
4,916 battles
1 hour ago, Iron_Salvo921 said:

Yeah I don't know why they kept talking about the Soviet Navy like it was the third best Allied navy of WW2 when it was a complete joke. The third navy should have been Australia or Canada. 

Yeah, the British numbers reported must not have included the commonwealth. At the end of the war for example, Canada had over 400 warships in its navy. All smaller ships: Cruisers, Destroyers and Corvettes. However, pretty impressive for a country of only 12 million people at that time.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
173
[F4E]
Members
336 posts
6,327 battles
2 hours ago, kayjay said:

The video was not clear as to weather the British numbers include the Commonwealth.  By the end of WW2  Canada had the 2nd biggest navy.

5th largest navy.  It had 95K personnel and approximately 270 ships.

In reality, Canada's navy contributed FAR more to the allied war effort than the Soviet navy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31
[NGA-B]
Alpha Tester
449 posts
11,170 battles
1 hour ago, Glamorboy said:

5th largest navy.  It had 95K personnel and approximately 270 ships.

In reality, Canada's navy contributed FAR more to the allied war effort than the Soviet navy.

Depends on what you count as a fighting ship.  

List of Royal Canadian Navy ships of the Second World War - Wikipedia  lists over 1000.  I counted 471 'fighting' ships.  YMMV

20 hours ago, The_Big_Woof said:

Cool Video.. Funny at the end where it talks about how these ships are in the game. While many are, there are also many deserving ships that are not, (USS NEVADA, HMS REPULSE, HMS INVINCABLE, to name a few) while we have a plethora of souped up paper ships that never made it past the design stage

Well we have Oklahoma, Nevada's sister.     Battlecruisers are a problem for WOWS whole tier/class construct.  Was a topic back in the day that adding a battlecruiser class would adversely impact matchmaking.  Might be time to revisit that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,872
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
8,944 posts
15,773 battles

I've had a look at some easy sources and the numbers, if they're going on submarines, destroyers, cruisers, capital ships and carriers are sometimes soid, though sometimes a bit off (and not sure why they show some).

Calling France the 2nd biggest navy in the world in 1939 seems incorrect by either numbers or tonnage. Numbers are fairly high but lower than the US. Lots of submarines.

Also worth pointing out that numbers aren't everything - the RN in 1940 was 1,161,000 tons, the combined Germans and Italians were 595,000.

image.png.6c030d4ab46197a5f717189366fd978e.png

 

Some notes:

Royal Navy, 328 DD, SS, CA/L and BB in 1939 - actually agrees nicely with the video.

524 in 1945, pretty close to the 508 of the video.

image.thumb.png.188fbeb4dade77a4a1ca88a1067956b5.png

Germany, 80 SS, DD, CA/L and BB - WG seems to give 103, could be the addition of torpedo boats and escorts:

image.thumb.png.d36b3822497d1ad6dbcb15bae13fa6c0.png

Russia 1941, 282 DD, SS, CA/L and BB - pretty close to the 272 of the video.

image.png.a2382b7a14f866f2ff2a35045d6728d0.png

Russia 1945, 211 DD, SS, CA/L and BB, also quite close to the 227 of the video:

image.thumb.png.c84a0496592467ea1d63e44202837139.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
435
[CRF]
Members
975 posts
8,966 battles
On 3/3/2021 at 6:17 PM, IfYouSeeKhaos said:

They always seem to get the date of Russia's intro into the war wrong...stating it as the date Germany betrayed their alliance & attacked them & omitting mention of the alliance & their actual inclusion in WWII at the start of that alliance.

Note: Just because a piece of signed paper only has the words "Anti Aggression Pact" in it's title doesn't cancel out the fact that when 2 powers (Russia & Germany) simultaneously attack a 3rd power (Poland...w/complete details on how to divvy it up beforehand...not just 2 powers coincidentally attacking at the same time w/no regard to each other at all) that it's actually an alliance.

Yea - Russia always seems to want not to mention the start of the war - I think they would like to ignore their entier history with Poland, including the Bolsheviks attack in 1919/1920...

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.

×