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

Lert's ADLA attempt: HMS Furious

58 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

24,018
[HINON]
Supertester
19,918 posts
13,384 battles

Hello and welcome to yet another thread where I pretend to know what I'm talking about.

 

This time I'll be discussing a very oddball ship indeed, HMS Furious:

 

E8c7Q5J.jpg

The carrier HMS Furious in the mid 1930's.

 

... Well, yes, that is HMS Furious, but that's a bit later in her career. I want to talk how she appeared before her conversion to flattop:

 

LnmHSQY.jpg

HMS Furious as built in 1916

 

That's better. That odd ramp afore is a so-called 'flying off' deck. As built she had a reasonably large hangar capacity for a ship of her size and type. But that's still not why I want to discuss her.

 

This is:

 

559bpy6.jpg

Aft turret on Furious, as built. Boom, baby. Are you feeling my mojo?

 

See that ridiculously oversized turretmounted sewerpipe? Yeah? That's an 18" BL Mk I. Furious was designed originally to carry two of those. In 1916. Take that, weebs. This is what her original design looked like:

 

EJ6qQFh.gif

Suck on those two, weebs.

 

During construction however it was decided to get rid of the forward 18" gun and mount half a flight deck instead.

 

So what kind of sick monstrosity was this ship that was designed to carry two 18" rifles in 1916? Well, the British classified her as a 'battlecruiser', but honestly? She was just a ridiculously large cruiser with enormously fat guns. "But wait," I hear you say, "Isn't that what a battlecruiser is, more or less?" Well, not really according to the British, because other famous British battlecruisers of the era had significantly more armor than Furious - halfway between a cruiser and a battleship. Furious on the other hand, had only the armor of a cruiser at best. Still, the British called it a battlecruiser, so that's what I am going to classify it -

 

What do you mean, "There is no battlecruiser class in this game"? What do you mean "Until there is, it'll either be a cruiser or a battleship in this game"? What do you mean "They were also called 'large light cruisers'"? That last one makes no sense whatsoever with her tonnage and armament.

 

Well, alright. But using existing in-game classification doesn't really fit for Furious. She has the speed and armor of a cruiser, but her armament and tonnage are way too large. She has the tonnage and armament to be a battleship, but her armor is way too low. Classifying her as either a cruiser or a battleship would significantly impact her tiering, though it remains exactly the same ship with exactly the same combat performance.

 

That's why I won't be following the ADLA standard and assigning a class and a tier. I will just be giving her stats, comparing them to in-game battleships as well as cruisers and talking a little bit about how the ship might work in the game. Other than that, you're welcome to make up your own mind about how to classify her, using the existing classes of the game.

 

First though, a little bit of history.

 

HMS Furious was laid down in 1915, launched in 1916 and commissioned in 1917. During construction it was decided to get rid of the forward turret and mount a flight deck and hangar facilities instead. She served as a test bed for sea-borne aviation facilities in this configuration for a while until the rear turret was also replaced with a flight deck, leading to this abomination of a ship:

 

lCLxCPc.jpg

Yes. That is, in fact, an aircraft carrier with a superstructure in the middle of the flight deck.

 

See the problem there? Aircraft had to navigate around the superstructure, which got in the way in all sorts of annoying manners:

 

sVEIWz9.jpg

Aircraft had two narrow bridges to taxi around the superstructure on.

 

This was so impractical that eventually in the mid 20's they decided to just remove the superstructure all together, connect the two flight decks and build a Hosho-esque, under-flight-deck forward bridge. She remained in this configuration until her scrapping in 1948.

 

Confused yet? That's ok.

 

Furious existed in four formats:

 

- As designed, a battlecruiser with 2x 18" rifles,

- As built, a battlecruiser / carrier hybrid with 1x 18" rifle

- After her first conversion, a highly impractical carrier with a superstructure in the middle

- After her second conversion, a proper carrier with a homogeneous flight deck

 

For the purpose of this ADLA I will be talking about the first variant, the as-designed. I'll let TalonV take care of the carrier portion, should he ever feel inclined to. I very rarely play carriers, and don't know enough about them to properly discuss them.

 

You might notice I've not gone into her combat career, or her (half-)sisters of the 'Courageous' class (which carried 2x 2 15"). I'm skipping all of that because this intro has gone on long enough already. If you want to know more, here's the wiki page on the Courageous class, here's the page on Furious herself.

 

Tonnage:

 

19,826 tons normal, 23,257 tons deep load. That's about 2000 tons over Des Moines, and about on par with Kawachi. Were we to treat her as a cruiser, she would have 8885 + (1.9202 x tonnage) = 53,543 hit points. As a battleship, 10756 + (1.1812 x tonnage) = 38,227 hit points. This all using dseehafer's formulas for hitpoints. So, depending on how we classify her, her hit points can vary by 15k.

 

Armor:

 

Belt: 51 - 76mm

Decks: 19 - 76mm

Barbettes: 76 - 178mm

Turrets: 178 - 229mm

Conning tower: 254mm

Torpedo bulkheads: 25 - 38mm

 

And there's why I think she wouldn't work as a battleship of any tier. She has the same maximum belt thickness as Omaha, which is really not known for being very resilient. Furious' armored decks and torpedo bulkheads are decent though, provided she doesn't get tiered too high. This really wasn't a ship designed to get shot at.

 

Armament:

 

2x BL Mk I 18"

11x BL Mk I 5.5"

2x 3" AA

2x 533mm torpedo tubes, submerged

 

These guns were ludicrously powerful for their time, firing a whopping 3320 lbs shell (suck it, Iowa 2700 lbs 'superheavy' shells!) at a relatively pedestrian muzzle velocity of 683 m/s with standard load, and a more respectable 738 m/s with a 'super charge' load. These guns would remain competitively destructive even compared to the most powerful WWII era battleships. For example, Yamato fired a 2998 lbs shell at 780 mp/.

 

Her firepower in combination with her tonnage makes Furious a real difficult ship to try to classify and tier. Combine this with me not being sure whether to adhere to cruiser rules or battleship rules for this ship, and it becomes nigh impossible. Were I to venture a guess I would say mid-tier cruiser though, in which she would have sufficient firepower to worry any target without being too overwhelming, and a metric butt ton of hit points compared to other cruisers of her tier.

 

This would be balanced out with a mediocre suite of secondaries, light cruiser level armor and absolutely pathetic AA, making her a hit points pinata for - well, anything shooting at her, really.

 

Since her torpedo tubes are submerged, WG would not include them, and I don't need to discuss them.

 

Speed:

 

As designed, Furious had 90,000 shp and a projected top speed of 31.5 knots. However, she never did her speed trials at sea, and after her final conversion she 'only' managed 30 knots. That's still a respectable speed for a WWI era ship of this tonnage and size, no matter how you classify her.

 

She was 240 meters long with a beam of 27 meters. This means her length:beam ratio was 8.88, which should give her quite good agility. To compare, Omaha has a ratio of 10.05, and we know how agile she is. The smaller the number, the better for agility. The higher the number, the better for straight-line speed. The fact that Furious manages such a good ratio while maintaining a 30+ knot top speed is respectable.

 

Concealment:

 

Should be fairly decent as well. There is not much in the way of superstructure, with basically only the navigation and gunnery command rooms, the funnel and the two masts sticking out above the turret tops. Compare this to a stock Kongou:

 

P03pBBC.jpg

 

You'll note that Furious has a lot less above the turret roofs than a stock Kongou does, so she should have better concealment, despite being a few meters longer and wider.

 

Pros:

 

- Fast

- Agile

- very powerful guns

- Amazing hit point pool

 

Cons:

 

- Soft

- Large

- Too few guns

- Pathetic AA

 

Conclusion:

 

I have no idea how to classify Furious or where to tier her. My guts say cruiser and put her around tier 5, but that would mean that she would have a godly heap of hit points. Other tiers? Maybe. One might argue for a low tier battleship, but I could counter that she doesn't have nearly enough armor to be considered one, having armor weaker than, say, a Hipper. And we all know how soft those are. Plus, one loosely defined rule-of-thumb for battleships is 'having sufficient armor to be sort-of proof against her own guns at a certain range', and Furious most certainly isn't.

 

I'm very curious to what you all think of Furious. Eh? eh? ... Tough crowd.

  • Cool 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,402
[FOXEH]
[FOXEH]
Alpha Tester
6,333 posts
10,642 battles

if they were to allow a 18 inch gun at tier 5 it would have to be ubar inaccurate! still the thought of it happening would just be baffling and halarious!:teethhappy:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,018
[HINON]
Supertester
19,918 posts
13,384 battles

Here's a thought: As built, as tier 4 premium carrier with her single 18" gun as secondary. :hiding:(Say, that's a very nice destroyer you've got there. Would be a shame if someth*BOOOM*)

 

But, no. I'd much rather see her as-designed variant in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,365
[MIA]
Supertester, Supertester
6,425 posts
7,704 battles

if they were to allow a 18 inch gun at tier 5 it would have to be ubar inaccurate! still the thought of it happening would just be baffling and halarious!:teethhappy:

 

And they say Nikolai needs a nerf...

 

18" for Tier 5?

 

2op4me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,018
[HINON]
Supertester
19,918 posts
13,384 battles

18" for Tier 5?

 

2x 18" with, say, 1.8 RPM doesn't put out nearly as much theoretical DPM as, say, 8x 6" with 9 RPM. Furious would be about alpha strike, not sustained damage.

 

That is, if you can hit your target at all with WG's patented dispersion.

 

I mean, if gun size was all that mattered, Furutaka wouldn't have built up the reputation she had pre-buffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
231 posts
7,291 battles

Great write-up on a very interesting ship. I kinda hope that all four versions make it into the game: the battlecruiser design and final carrier forms for their gameplay value, and the intermediate hybrid forms for their comedic, oddball value.

 

Also, your ADLAs seem to be well researched. What sources do you use?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[S0L0]
Members
963 posts
5,189 battles

I think this falls in the category of "Extraordinary, Fascinating Boat that just won't work." Two main guns, when they don't want to sell Mikasa because of main gun numbers? And how do you balance the guns anyhow, I agree that that T5 seems to be a nice fit for the hull, but 2 18"???  Normal WG accuracy, and you are simply making BIG splashes every so often, not a good selling point. If you give them accuracy to actually hit what they are pointed at, one 18" HE shell hit will kill two targets, the one you fired at, and the one next to him, who suddenly discovers he has the dismembered bow of a destroyer on the aft deck of his boat...

 

Matt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,719
[HINON]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
8,856 posts
3,680 battles

I loved this review! 1930s Furious is very sexy! Then they ruined her with that derpy carrier island. Cant wait to see her in game, hopefully as a carrier. Although the stock hull with the 18" secondary guns would be... amusing. :playing:

 

Speaking of derpy carrier Islands...

 

cvfurious19181.png

 

 

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,018
[HINON]
Supertester
19,918 posts
13,384 battles

What sources do you use?

 

Wikipedia, navweaps.com and google.

 

I loved this review!

 

BtupNpI.gif

 

Two main guns, when they don't want to sell Mikasa because of main gun numbers?

Mikasa's problem is a mixed main gun battery. IRL the ship fought as much with what in-game are secondaries, as main armament. Furious doesn't have that problem. The rest of your concerns are completely valid though. My thread is more a 'look at this interesting boat' rather than 'WG should totally add this'.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,693
[DAKI]
[DAKI]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
12,921 posts
4,826 battles

Navweaps list the guns on Furious has having 1 RPM, with 738mps velocity with super charges. With only 2 shells every minute, no guarantee of hitting because dispersion, velocity, WASD hax, then the chance of overpen at such low tiers...doesn't sound particularly fun.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
1,477 posts
16 battles

Personally I think she should be a tier 6 regular carrier, something the RN can't really manage a lot of. (Unicorn & Furious are the two on my books) - I don't fancy the chances of her turning up with 2 18" guns, however amusing it may be!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,018
[HINON]
Supertester
19,918 posts
13,384 battles

Navweaps list the guns on Furious has having 1 RPM

 

Because WG has never fudged with ROF numbers ever ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[S0L0]
Members
963 posts
5,189 battles

 

. The rest of your concerns are completely valid though. My thread is more a 'look at this interesting boat' rather than 'WG should totally add this'.

 

 

And it is absolutely a fascinating boat, and a good write up. Keep them coming, man!

 

Matt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,693
[DAKI]
[DAKI]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
12,921 posts
4,826 battles

 

Because WG has never fudged with ROF numbers ever ...

 

Woohoo 1.8RPM buff and 3.6 shells in the air per minute. I'm going to dominate tier 5 now with Furious. Now hold still red enemy ship whilst I shoot my slow floaty shells at you. Also could you be a sport and not fire back? Especially you banana coloured Kongo, please don't point your guns at me. :hiding:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,453
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
3,985 posts
1,766 battles

Given a choice, I'd take the hybrid variant.  Hardly the most practical one, but life as a carrier would be complete on the day your 18" secondary scores that one in a million shot and rofl-detonates a pursuing Kongo through the nose... :playing:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,018
[HINON]
Supertester
19,918 posts
13,384 battles

 

Woohoo 1.8RPM buff and 3.6 shells in the air per minute. I'm going to dominate tier 5 now with Furious. Now hold still red enemy ship whilst I shoot my slow floaty shells at you. Also could you be a sport and not fire back? Especially you banana coloured Kongo, please don't point your guns at me. :hiding:

 

1) Name me any tier 5 cruiser that doesn't have the same mantra when fighting a battleship?

 

2) I never claimed Furious would be perfectly balanced, or even could be. I'm not sure what you're trying to prove here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
472
[BHSN]
Members
2,559 posts
3,844 battles

nice research, personally, no interest in a boat with that much of an identity crisis. 

 

That and it's fugly. 

Edited by scruffycavetroll

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
52 posts
8,911 battles

Heh, I'm picturing her as a tech tree ship with all 4 configurations as researchable hulls.  Now that would be a unique grind.


 

Very unique, and bizarre, history to this ship.  Thanks for the fun read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
472
[BHSN]
Members
2,559 posts
3,844 battles

Heh, I'm picturing her as a tech tree ship with all 4 configurations as researchable hulls.  Now that would be a unique grind.

 

 

Very unique, and bizarre, history to this ship.  Thanks for the fun read.

 

actually, that would be neat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,693
[DAKI]
[DAKI]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
12,921 posts
4,826 battles

Don't mind me, I'm just cynical about how fun it would be in the context of WoWs. Imho it just wouldn't throw out enough lead, and is an extreme case of the 'Myogi syndrome' of having big guns for its tier but not enough of them. I'm convinced that for every salvo which results in LOLCITPENINSTANTDELETE, there's going to be many many more where it's fails to hit anything. My suspicion is that it would be an extremely frustrating ship for a lot of people and hard to do well in.

 

Whilst interesting, it's something of a flawed oddball,  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,018
[HINON]
Supertester
19,918 posts
13,384 battles

Whilst interesting, it's something of a flawed oddball,  

 

Yarp. Completely agree. It's the main reason for writing this thread to begin with. Writing about oddballs is kinda becoming my thing for my ADLA's.

 

Kinda says a lot about me too I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[S0L0]
Members
963 posts
5,189 battles

Heh, I'm picturing her as a tech tree ship with all 4 configurations as researchable hulls.  Now that would be a unique grind.

 

 

 

actually, that would be neat. 

 

Make it the Tier 5 cruiser that sidegrades to both the BB and CV lines, each hull leads to a different line.

 

Matt

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,131
[HINON]
Supertester, Alpha Tester
2,533 posts
4,787 battles

Don't mind me, I'm just cynical about how fun it would be in the context of WoWs. Imho it just wouldn't throw out enough lead, and is an extreme case of the 'Myogi syndrome' of having big guns for its tier but not enough of them. I'm convinced that for every salvo which results in LOLCITPENINSTANTDELETE, there's going to be many many more where it's fails to hit anything. My suspicion is that it would be an extremely frustrating ship for a lot of people and hard to do well in.

 

Whilst interesting, it's something of a flawed oddball,  

 

Whilst I agree with you in some respects..  for those of us who are not min/maxers and just enjoy really odball ships and things.. This would be an awesome ship and the ONE battle that you obliterated a T5/6/7 battleship in one shot would make up for the hundreds of others where you did stuff all in it:)

 

I can also see it being used as area denial..  not much at those tiers that would want to get in range of that possibility :)

 

M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[S0L0]
Members
963 posts
5,189 battles

 

Whilst I agree with you in some respects..  for those of us who are not min/maxers and just enjoy really odball ships and things.. This would be an awesome ship and the ONE battle that you obliterated a T5/6/7 battleship in one shot would make up for the hundreds of others where you did stuff all in it:)

 

I can also see it being used as area denial..  not much at those tiers that would want to get in range of that possibility :)

 

M

 

Floating KV-2??? hmm, might be more playable than I thought...

 

Matt

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,131
[HINON]
Supertester, Alpha Tester
2,533 posts
4,787 battles

 

Floating KV-2??? hmm, might be more playable than I thought...

 

Matt

 

Biggest issue is that the range of those guns would mean you are shooting at someone in the next battle over, not the one you're actually in  :hiding:

 

M

  • Funny 1

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.

×