Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
banzai014

How will UK ships be represented? Will they suck at everything?

139 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
13 posts
460 battles

So far each nation in the game has a theme to its navy's strengths and weaknesses. Russians have high gun range, Japs have torp spam and stealth but poor turret traverse, the US has good aa.

 

Yet I am struggling to think of what strengths the Royal Navy will have. All I can find are weaknesses. Looking at their historical record in WWII, I can see why Wargaming are dilly dallying over adding them in. The conduct of the Royal Navy was just not that good in the war, and their technology makes it hard to fill up a ten-tier roster owing to the UK's backwardness. 

 

What WWII showed the world was that Great Britain was a poor country, spread too thin. Within two years of the end of the war, their colonies would be rebelling and leaving their rule en masse after realizing that their so-called masters were no better than themselves and even incompetent. For fifteen years afterwards, the UK would be stuck with heavy rationing, eating dripping on toast, while the USA was enjoying its boom time and Japan and Germany were rising up to become the industrial powerhouses they are today. Winston Churchill bankrupt and destroyed an empire to get back at a personal enemy, just like how GWB almost bankrupted the nation pursuing a family grudge (Saddam). If one nation lost WWII, it was Great Britain.

 

The UK's naval record is pretty embarrassing and fits in with a poor nation making do with what it has. Using biplanes on their carriers, taking on the Bismarck with a WWI relic and so dooming the lives of thousands of sailors. "Kamikaze" human wave style tactics where they tried to rush down longer range, bigger gun ships (Bismarck, Graf Spee) with weaker ships - damn the casualties, the British officer class is a callous one as Somme, Gallipoli showed. Not building new ships, with Lion being cancelled, etc., and having to borrow everything from the Americans, destroyers, flight wings (hellcats, corsairs).

 

The navy is known more for its spectacular losses, which speak of technically badly made ships, and their victories are always because of luck - hitting the fuel supply on the Graf Spee, so she had to be scuttled because she didn't have the range to go anywhere, hitting the radar on the Scharnhorst, hitting the rudder on the Bismarck. The only Allied navy to lose battleships to air power at sea (Repulse, Prince of Wales), Convoy PQ17, losing multiple carriers and battleships,  even having battleships sunk by submarines at port. They developed another biplane to replace the swordfish, and their late war carrier aircraft were laughable - with seafires having pitiful range. 

 

I mean what was the Royal Navy good at? Escorting cargo ships when submarines aren't even in the game? I cannot find any material strengths for the Royal Navy. All I can think of wargaming adding a human element to represent the "get it done" attitude of the UK and their luck: having a lower chance of fire on their own ships, and having a higher change of causing fire to enemy ships. 

 

I can see why the Royal Navy is being added in last. What a joke of a nation.

 

 

Edited by banzai014

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,270
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,441 posts
509 battles

I can see why the Royal Navy is being added in last. What a joke of a nation.

 

inb4 Super_D and mr3awsome arrive

Edited by Higgle
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,463
[SALVO]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,598 posts
7,430 battles

They wont suck...the Warspite kicks some serious ship if played right.

 

Plus.....you get a citadel in one you have to type in all chat:

 

tumblr_static___sticker_375x360.png

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
399 posts
44 battles

Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries. 

  • Cool 18

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,463
[SALVO]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,598 posts
7,430 battles

Lord Nelson's Trousers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
395
[DRACS]
Supertester, In AlfaTesters
879 posts
4,844 battles

I expect Royal Navy ships to be quite good.

 

The Warspite, for example, can repair citadel damage.

 

I'm looking forward to Tirpitz, but I don't see any German ships getting the ability of the Grand Ole Lady.

 

Also, obvious trolling thread is obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
300
[WKY20]
Members
1,313 posts
7,071 battles

Are you asking or trolling with your title?

 

God, what happens to all the intelligent decent people on the internet?

Edited by LifePilgrim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
13 posts
460 battles

So do we have to host images ourselves because I cannot post pictures of HMS Ark Royal, Barham, Hood and so on getting blown up to support my OP.

 

And will British carriers still be using biplanes at tier 7+?

Edited by banzai014

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
275
[KIA]
Members
1,856 posts
7,765 battles

Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries. 

 

You don't frighten us, English pig-dogs! Go and boil your bottoms, son of a silly person! Ah blow my nose at you, so-called "Arthur Keeeng"! You and all your silly English Knnnnnnnn-ighuts!!!
Edited by Skeem689
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,480 posts
8,824 battles

The navy is known more for its spectacular losses, which speak of technically badly made ships, and their victories are always because of luck - hitting the fuel supply on the Graf Spee, so she had to be scuttled because she didn't have the range to go anywhere, hitting the radar on the Scharnhorst, hitting the rudder on the Bismarck.

 

 

This is a weird criticism.  "Sure, they repeatedly destroyed German vessels of allegedly superior design, but it was all luck!"  Maybe those German ships weren't so superior after all if they all had key vulnerabilities that kept getting hit.

 

Frankly, the Kriegsmarine's record in the second world war is much worse than the RN's, and the IJN's from 1944 on was completely abysmal too.  At least the RN kicked the tar out of the Italians and also performed well in the first world war (ie: tiers 1-6 of this game.)

 

Outside of the Solomans Campaign there wasn't very much back and forth naval fighting in the second world war so most fights were pretty one-sided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,605
[HINON]
Beta Testers
3,931 posts
8,150 battles

Judging by the Warspite, it seems like they will have good armor, maneuverability, and generally decent guns with decent AA, bad range and bad fire control systems. However the Warspite is really good if you play it right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
19 posts
2,404 battles

Are you asking or trolling with your title?

 

God, what happens to all the intelligent decent people on the internet?

 

I suspect they read the OP's post and then decided not to comment, given the questionable logic.
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
162
[NORUN]
Members
695 posts
8,870 battles

And if you give Warspite the main battery accuracy upgrade in slot 2 just watch those citadels roll in.  And the US Battleships until North Carolina wish they had Warspite's range.  Warspite also pretty much dances and has decent concealability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,366
[-K-]
Members, Beta Testers
3,105 posts
10,282 battles

The title and some of the content were a bit trollish, intentional or not, but the question itself is a good one.  The last battleship ever built, the HMS Vanguard, is no better than a tier 8.  The planned Lion-class ships would be alright at tier 9, and there's no paper blueprints that I'm aware of that would fit at tier 10, other than some 1944/1945 Super Lion upgrade that has a buffed reload and great gun characteristics to compensate for the fact that it has Iowa-class firepower a tier higher.

 

I think British carriers will be fine.  They have plenty to choose from and should be popular.  I'd like to argue that they'll need to bend history a bit in order to get comparable aircraft for each tier, but current aircraft tiering is already one of the least realistic things in the game anyway, so they'll just mix and match aircraft as needed to make it work.  At least the British biplanes were actually used in World War 2!

 

Destroyers should be fine, with plenty of options and some that would be unique to the game.  I think cruisers could be a bit rough to extend to tier 10, as the only heavy cruisers with 8"/203mm guns were the County and York classes, both of which had only eight and six guns respectively.  That's Aoba-level firepower.  They had several newer classes of light cruiser, but they're all comparable to the Cleveland class at best.  If they eventually take light cruisers to tier 10 as rumored then they can flesh out a full cruiser tree, but until then I think it could be difficult.

 

Whether it was due to economical reasons or just a stricter adherence to the naval treaties than other nations, the Royal Navy suffered the most from treaty-based designs.  It's apparent in everything from cruiser design, to the "modern" KGV-class battleships using a 14"/45 gun that the US Navy hadn't used since the Pennsylvania class 24 years earlier.

Edited by Mesrith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
346
[STURM]
Alpha Tester
2,216 posts
22,456 battles

KGV best BB!!

 

Well, maybe not the best, but certainly the most well rounded at tier 7, though you get 16.1" guns on the Nagato.

 

 

Also, do you even history bro?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
139
[OJITT]
Beta Testers
521 posts
3,221 battles

Say what you will about the tech-level gap,  but the Royal Navy won pretty close to every major naval engagement against the Kriegs Marine.  There ships were cost efficient and effective.  Warspite stands as a good example, 30 year service reccord (outdated POS) who partook in the most bloody and famous battles of the war.

 

The UK have a rich naval history with plenty of experience on how to wage war at sea.

 

 

 

The only Allied navy to lose battleships to air power at sea 

 

 

Ever heard of Pearl Harbor? 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Hereticus2142
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,366
[-K-]
Members, Beta Testers
3,105 posts
10,282 battles

KGV best BB!!

 

Well, maybe not the best, but certainly the most well rounded at tier 7, though you get 16.1" guns on the Nagato.

 

I just know that my KGV will always get it's 4-gun turrets knocked out of commission, while the 2-gun turrets escape unharmed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
194
[CONQR]
Beta Testers
895 posts
13,174 battles

 

 

The UK have a rich naval history with plenty of experience on how to wage war at sea.

 

 Ever heard of Pearl Harbor

 

 

 

 

 

i bolded something for your argument c=

Edited by Kancollewuzhere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
13 posts
460 battles

 

 

Whether it was due to economical reasons or just a stricter adherence to the naval treaties than other nations, the Royal Navy suffered the most from treaty-based designs.  

 

And the naval treaties were created because the UK knew they couldn't compete with the world's navies.  The UK were the poor man in WWII, selling off chunks of their territory to buy destroyers. Out of all the nations that are going to be in the game, UK is probably the second worst navy (ship vs ship) behind Russia (and Italy, if they add them in).

 

Ever heard of Pearl Harbor? 

 

The US ships were sunk in port. The UK were the only Allied nation to have their battleships sunk by airpower while they were maneuvering (Repulse and Prince of Wales). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
162
[NORUN]
Members
695 posts
8,870 battles

And what is really sad about the guns for KGV is that Britain could have used a more effective alternative that Armstrong came up with for the Imperial Russian Navy's Borodino class battlecruisers that never got finished, a 14in/52 caliber gun that was never delivered.  Since those BCs were intended to pack 12 of them a piece, there would have been enough guns for the entire KGV class.  Too bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
376
[S_E_A]
Beta Testers
2,709 posts
4,563 battles

I was wondering why OP's name sounds familiar. Looked him up, here are some choice keks from his other thread.

 

http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/18240-please-remove-sky-cancer-carriers-from-the-game/page__st__380__p__681480#entry681480

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×