Fallenkezef

Member
  • Content count

    4,987
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7
medal

Fallenkezef last won the day on April 22

Fallenkezef had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4,459 Outstanding

6 Followers

About Fallenkezef

  • Rank
    Tea and banjo specialist

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    UK
  • Interests
    Theologian, amateur historian and Teaboy

Recent Profile Visitors

3,170 profile views
  1. If WW2 taught one lesson it is that victory did not go to the best kit. In the end you don't need the best gun, you just need a gun that is good enough to do the job. Mostly it's turned into a friendly discussion on WW2 naval matters. I wish the GF forum could be more like this
  2. Like I said, the British believed that accurate, 14inch plunging fire would be as effective as 15/16inch direct fire. Considering the German's armour it did turn out to be a pretty good idea when you think about it. We had 10 BB's with 15 inch guns, 2 with 16 inch and 3 BC's with 15 inch guns when the KGV was designed. The KGV's where always designed to supplement, not replace, our existing battlewagons. The KGV gave a capability that supplemented what we already had, they where highly accurate and the sinking of the Bismarck showed how they where meant to work alongside other ships.
  3. A Fair enough Also we where bound by the London treaty which did limit Naval calibre to 14inches. While this was reverted to 16 in 1937 the British had already designed a very accurate and effective 14inch weapon.
  4. And?
  5. You are rather cherry picking here. Our KGV's never operated alone and the whole thing was designed for plunging fire, we learned from the BC debacle in Jutland (and drilled home with the Hood) that the best way to kill a Battleship was with plunging fire. This is why we designed the KGV with good deck armour and paired the KGV's with a warship that could go in and keep the enemy at the distance the KGV preferred. All our previous designs had 15 and 16 inch guns. We went with 14inch in the KGV for a valid reason, they where far more accurate and effective, especialy when paired with radar. People cherry pick direct comparisons without looking at the smaller and more important details. The KGV was never built to put a round through the hull of a BB, it was built to drop it through the deck and this it did do quite well.
  6. True dat
  7. Aye, the whole thing had beenbrefreshingly civilised
  8. One of the reason our tanks where so bad. All our tesources went into keeping the navy and aviation cutting edge
  9. Hood was 30's and the KGV class where 1940 and 1941. We built more KGV's than the Scharnhorst and Bismark class combined. I am enjoying the current detente
  10. I'm the op and I said nothing of the kind. I was pointing out how hard it would be to balance. Others have made valid points regarding how to balance the German ships. Wehrabbo-Teaboy relations may be stony in regards to tanks but we have found some common ground in ships.
  11. How the hell can you call KM irrelevent?
  12. Only the BB's and Renown class where old. Our Cruiser fleet was 30's era. Warspite hit a far smaller and harder target so we'll call it even
  13. Interestingly the record for Naval gunnery is held jointly by the KM and RN. Scharnhorst and Warspite both have confirmed hits at a range of 24km
  14. Now the Italian ships, those where some nice girls. I'd grind pasta for the Vittorio
  15. The Guns thing balances out as British tended to put more if them on our ships. County had 8 8inch, Town had 12 6inch Also we had to stick to the Washington and London treaties on size and armament
  16. Thats a given but she was inly scuttled because two Britis BB's battered her to submission
  17. I an not the Germanphobe you lot think I am. I love the KM ships, wonderful designs but they suffered a nasty design flaw. Germany built her girls to rapidly destroy merchantmen while avoiding an engagement with the RN. RN was too large for this to ever work. Sooner or later we'd track the buggers down and bring them to battle. Now those wonderful xxxxxxxx in the Subs with balls of steel and the hearts of wolves, they had the right idea. Canny aggression and reckless courage nearly tooj us out of the war. RN was like that, Ajax and Achilles where outclassed but they pressed the engagement
  18. They where pocket battleships, neither fish nor fowl. A whole new class designed for fast surface raiding. When determining a ship class I tend to go with the people who built it
  19. Splitting hairs? The RN did not consider CV's to be capital ships in thier order of battle. Which is why we lost so many, idiots kept sending them out alone with just a few DD's while the true caps operated in teams
  20. Personaly I don't think a BC should be in. Cruiser line. We had a CA replacement for the county class planned
  21. She was a CV, seperate class. RN was stupid, had a CV with no cruiser or capital ship escort and paid the price. Good kill on the German's part snd a well deserved battle honour
  22. Bismark was not the only RN v KM encounter. KM surface fleet lost almost every encounter. Only British capital ship not lost to the, very capable and excellently crewed, uboats was Hood Put Hood in the BB line at 7.7 and I'll sign off in that in a heartbeat
  23. Here we go, the usual "Britain where crap, lost the war and where inferior in every way" brigade. The facts say otherwise. The entire German surface fleet was sunk or blockaded by 1942. The KM gambled, built surface raiders rather than proper line of battle ships and they lost that gamble. The RN had better ships and more of them. The REAL threat to the RN in Europe was Italy. We spent allot of effort and resources keeping the Italians in the med because thier fleet was a serious challenge. It's not German bashing, they had better tanks. Britain put the bulk of her resources into the navy
  24. Considering the KGV and Rodney defeated the Bismark in real life, apparently not.
  25. When you think of it KGV v Bismark is fairly even. I'd rather have a Nelson or Warspite but that is just personsl preference
  26. 10 14inch guns is a weak armament?
  27. Oh look, another German whine post. Maybe I should whine on forum everytime my Chally sees a Tiger2?
  28. So to balance all we have to do is make things up like WoWS?
  29. Cent will go to 7.3 so it gets caught in 8.3 atgm bracket to protect IS6
  30. Atlantic fleet just gave me the idea, not basing anything on it. Going by real life specs and capabilities. When I play Jerry I run a Scharny/German CA kill team 11inch spam
  31. In WW2 Germany had 2 classes CA only one CL Just 2 BB classes and one potential paper class Britain had 2 CA and 3 CL class with a paper CL and 4 BB (all superior to the German) and 2 BC
  32. That only works with a broad range to choose from. WW2 naval doesn't have that broad a range unless you do a WoWS and just make stuff up as you go along
  33. Meh only British tank on offer is a paper proto Not worth the grind
  34. I was playing Atlantic fleet this morning, merrily seal clubbing Scharnhorst with the Warspite and it occured to me that this is historical. Germany would get creamed in a proper naval game, just as they got creamed in real life. How do you balance a Town or Dido class CL against the Koln? German DD's are average at best, lacking sugnificant torpedo loads conpared to the British DD's With BB's it is just a bad joke really you'd need the fictional H39 class to equal the historical KGV class and every BB in British service (including the second line WW1 era ships) outgun and outclass Scharnhorst and equal the Bismark.
  35. True that, I did my British fighter grind strafing ground targets till my birds where good enough to hold thier own and spaded them against aircraft
  36. It's ALWAYs the Tiget 1 and 2 players that fill this forum with whineposts. I blame the history channel
  37. Cent was desighnen in 43/44 as a direct counter to the Panther. Only arrived so late due to a hold on tank design. Wherever a panther is in br a Mk1 should be as they are comparable. Panther has better mobility and profile while Cent has better boomstick and turret. Brs post 6.0 in this game are a mess however which is why I love my tigers at 5.7 its the last balanced br. Dunno what all the whining is about tbh
  38. I'll take the APHE everytime. What's not to like about an unhistorical mini-nuke in a damage model that ignores history?
  39. Given a choice between chally and tiger, which would you pick? Looking at your stats you seemed to have no objection to farming with the Panzer 4f2.......
  40. Somehow i doubt the captain of the Bismark would of been in a mood to scuttle her if not for the rain of 15inch shells
  41. So a HEAVY tank can not be penned from the front? WOW! You can't pen the ufp of a Tiger2 with a 6.3 tank, so by that logic the Tiger 2 should be 7.0
  42. What is with these jerrytanker whine posts? I swear the Jerrytank community are the single biggest bunch of crybabies on this forum. You have more Jerrywhine posts than you get from the other 4 nation fans put together!
  43. The FPE and parts thing is the ONLY reason I am not going above the Tiger 1 in German tree or advancing in American tree which would normaly lead me to buying premium time, premium tanks and paying to get though some of the less fun vehicles. Gaijin has lost money in my case over this
  44. Drive the Avenger and Challenger and then come whine
  45. You what? Bismark was sunk by HMS Rodney and HMS King George V, both where Battleships
  46. Complete and utter nonesense I am an AB only guy and I have no trouble angling the Tiger in AB games, it's so EASY to do in the urban maps as you have walls everywhere you can use to anchor as you turn
  47. I once encountered a bloke who used statistics to prove that Germany won WW2
  48. Yeah, like I said " Most tanks wrecked after a battle where wrecked by their own side to deny them to the enemy. "
  49. Why do people make such a big deal about IS6 in 6.7 games? It's br 7,0, that's ONE tier removed from 6.7 in a system with two tiers either way.
  50. No British tank in either Gulf war used HEAT-FS. The nearest HEAT-FS round for the smoothbore 120mm was gathering dust in a Jordanian arms depot several hundred miles southwest
  51. I could live with a one tier br spread rather than the current two tier
  52. I can live with that, most tiger drivers play like bots anyway
  53. I hate Tortoise with a passion, not used it for over six months
  54. Lets play Thunderskill says you have ONE sim battle and no rating in that mode. Sorry, by your logic you are not entitled to an opinuon anymore goddbye, thanks for playing
  55. I do. You want an RB only discussion, post in the section clearly labeled as such......
  56. People are getting very desperate if they are using thunderskill to try and discredit arguments.
  57. He conveniantly missed the number of games played. My RB stats are crap because of how little I play it
  58. Your point?
  59. So childish personal insults when you cant get your way?
  60. You german drivers dont seem to mind one shotting a Cromwell from any angle or range.....
  61. How often does that actualy happen? Almost all conqs ingame tend to be secondary tanks in chieftain lineups I could take his stupid logic further Leo stomps Conq
  62. I'd rather face an IS6 in my centurion than a tiger 2
  63. The br range is 0.7 to 0.7 6.7 tanks meeting 7.0 is ONE step removed. I don't see the issue. The other day my 4.7 Fireflies walked into a 5.7 game. You may note I did not run whining to the forums. I put my grown up pants on and got on with it
  64. I am listening, just you are wrong. All your points about the Tiger have been argued and dissproved. Now you are just whining about russian bias
  65. Seriously if you cant play the Tiger at 5.7, 5.3 will not help you.
  66. I wonder how much this is cultural to be honest. Britain has always relied on line of battle warships from the 64gun third rates of the 18th and 19th century to the cruiser and BB squadrons of WW2. British thinking has always disliked the small ship and this didn't change till budget cuts after the 60's meant we couldn't support a large navy anymore. British thinking at the start of WW2 was that DD's where just for escorting merchants and making a nuisance of themselves while the big ships did the real work which is why we built light cruisers as our "workhorse" warships while America did realise and develop the potential of destroyers and continue to this day. The USN was built a foundation of 19th century Frigates and has always been good with the smaller ships. I don't think the American admiralty ever figured out how to use cruisers to be honest. US cruisers always seemed an afterthought with the BB's built to engage in standup fights and the DD's built to do everything else while we built the CL's to be our jack of all trades. If you look at the RN in 1939 we had 15 BB/BC class, 15 CA's and 41 CL's with just 181 DD's while the USN by 1941 had 17 BB's, 171 DD's but only 18 CA's, 17 CL's and 4 AAA cruisers. As the war progressed we kept mass producing DD's just to be used as anti-sub weapons while making more CL's for workhorse roles while America focused on CV's and DD's that where far more versatile. However I still say the Tribal was the best DD for a straight up fight Major off topic I admit, but this thread is just silly at this point anyway.
  67. With those I tend to just move and either force them to move or deny them a target
  68. I prefer the MK3 Cent to be honest, for tge stab
  69. I always have HESH loaded. I see a Maus, nail it's mantlet then reload with APDS. Maus is the only tank my Chieftain cant wreck with HESH
  70. 7 pages? It was probably a panther
  71. You are coming across as a bit desperate. The fact is the Tiger H1 is an excellent tank. Easy to angle and sidescrape, great mobility and a lethal gun. It is fine where it is at 5.7
  72. I'll concede the point in aircraft. Direct comparison is pretty useless due to varied roles and the aircraft that do share roles such as P47 v Tempest/Typhoon for CAS work tend to come out fairly equal. As for RN, again it comes to role I guess. RN and USN built for different doctrine and strategy. I will conced that the later US BB's where formidable but experience in the Pacific showed the value of armoured decks. British CV's where virtualy immune to bombing and kamikaze attacks. In fact of all the British CV's lost in WW2 all but one whete to U-boat attack with the other ambushed by a German surface raider. Wing size v surviveability is an argument that can last weeks. Britis DD's are uniformaly inferior in AAA because British doctrine called for the light cruisers to perform AA roles in a battlegroup. The Town, Colony and Dido class had formidable AAA abilities. Also our CL's where "pocket" heavy cruisers with superior firepower to other CL's with 12 6inch guns that could (and did) meet German heavies on an equal footing.
  73. Well no, I play like meds because they are that good. Med mobility with Heavy armour and gun
  74. News to me, I play my Tiggers like medium tanks
  75. This thread needs to be locked at this point
  76. Tribal and J class DD's where better than American counterparts Our CV's had much better armour and we invented the use of cats and angled decks I'll match the KGV BB against the Anerican counterparts as to topic, why is it even still going?
  77. Churchy is easier to immobilise and flank however
  78. We had better ships and planes, I can live with 2 out of 3
  79. You appear to be the triggered troll with these personal, childish attacks
  80. Only German tanks are overtiered, are you not listening to the poor bullied OP? Stop being Germanphobic you evil teaboy!
  81. In WT HESH is modeled as HE with pen so you get these stupid results. Then again it works both ways, shoot HESH at the gun mantlet on a Maus and you can set it on fire most of the time.
  82. Pretty much
  83. Who are you on about? "Tea plebs" Checking Fernet_Coca in thunderskill is very telling, top 5 planes and tanks are all ONE nation..... Top 5 tanks (all German) have more games together than any other nation played. Look up the word "hypocrisy"
  84. Tomahawk is around 1.5 Million
  85. Yup, I remember the mockery from Jerrytankers after the solid shot and apds nerfs.
  86. Cant pen British tanks? Seriously? Ok, best joke I have heard all day.
  87. Every British tank at 5.7 has less armour and a worse performing gun (no aphe) than the tiger. By the OP's logic all Britis tanks must immediately be 5.3. Screw it, lower ALL 5.7 tanks to 5.3!
  88. Yeah, this is a L2p issue not a br one
  89. Dont drag AB into this. I play AB but still use common sense and angle my Tigers. Only thing I'm scared of is 122mm guns.
  90. Put Tiger to 5.3 and we'll have a whine post the next day because a Centurion MK1 penned thier tank and demans that the Tiger go to 4.7
  91. So? If you angle right that same shot will bounce
  92. Same with this IS6 stuff, the MK10 Cent had become a favoured tank for it's HESH
  93. Can I have my Black Prince lowered to 5.3 because every now and again it faces 6.7 tanks? Just insert all the Tiger H1 arguments to save time.........
  94. That differs from the half dozen books I have about the British in North Africa
  95. pretty much
  96. A 7.62mm AA MG post-1950 is as much use as a snowball in the sahara so they always ended up as anti-infantry guns anyway.
  97. I do need to address this "shoot it till it blows myth". In battle, crews engaged threats. After they hit a tank and it stopped moving and shooting, they didn't ignore the other threats just to pump rounds into it. They engaged the next target. Also it makes little sense to wreck an enemy tank when they can be so useful! All sides descended on the battlefield after an engagement like locusts to scrounge what they could. Food, kit, fuel etc. In North Africa the British fuel containers where crappy cardboard things, "Jerrycans" where in high demand as battle salvage. Most tanks wrecked after a battle where wrecked by their own side to deny them to the enemy.
  98. Gaijon's attitude to what is "realistic" is rather amusing.
  99. Also I think in RB people tend to cherry pick their tanks more. I did notice some stupid variations in br when I dabbled in RB.
  100. Sometimes happens with Brit APDS aswell I prefer to aim just where the turret and hull meet
  101. Not been my experience rb or ab? I play ab
  102. The problem is 6.7+ and T5 too much compression. At 6.0 and down things seem pretty balanced
  103. German is my second most played line and currently loving my 5.7 Tiger line up. But please, continue with your strawman
  104. What 6.7 games? My two tiger + panther 5.7 lineup is one of my current faves and I have only been in ONE 6.7 game this week. MM meta had changed, 6.7's get dragged into 7.0 games leaving 5.7 free and clear
  105. Nice post, shame it has nothing to do with the topic...... Everybody agrees that post-WW2 the BB is obsolete. The op stated that Battleships did nothing in WW2, which is blatantly and stupidly false.
  106. Yeah the Germans kept claiming they had sunk Arc Royal till they finaly pulled it off
  107. You have been posting that exact same link for a month a) These may be very different from the real, because we are monitoring only those players who use our site. b) those battle numbers have remained unchanged for over a month. Cherry picking old data much?
  108. The Centurion MK3's main opponent in reality where North Korean T34's. Italian tests with 75mm HESH destroyed Soviet T34's.
  109. I think we started our love affair with hesh when we developed the 165mm Demo gun. 83mm is not to small a calibre when you look at the Italian results with 75mm HESH in WW2. But I've never seen anything to suggest we had a 20pdr HESH round
  110. Cry me a river? Poor Tiger2's not able to roflstomp 5.7 anymore? Other nations have had problems being uptiered before. No German player had a problem with the fireflies facing 6.0 with 17pdr solid shot when they where br5.0. Every now and again the meta changes at certain brs, adapt or die
  111. Honestly I don't see a huge problem with the Chieftain. Ammo is free and I rarely make less than 20k and I'm an average player. You don't play top tier for a profit.
  112. Pretty much
  113. depends on point of view, T5 is the best for British right now
  114. Aye I'll be playing my Achiles after work
  115. HESH is still a one shot ammo of choice so all good.
  116. You do realise I was agreeing with you right?
  117. You dont understand. All German tanks where invulnerable to British ammo and the mighty German army never lost a tank to enemy fire while easily killing everything they encountered. These guys live in a very odd fantasy land
  118. Someone is triggered
  119. At work atm, will go through my ballistics books later. It all depends on what you hit and how hard it is. I dislike blanket statements. Especialy from people who have previously implied all British ammo was useless and shattered on the superior German tanks.
  120. Want some of my popcorn?
  121. The nazis had the whole cult of personality thing going on, they prised and lionised the individual. Allot of soldiers, sailors and airmen got picked out as symbols whether they liked it or not.
  122. Reading that propoganda again? APHE has an inherent flaw that leads to shattering due to the fact it's a hollow round with a core both lighter and less dence than the surrounding shell. It's called physics, the thicket the armour inpacted, the higher the chance to shatter. Every APHE shell ever made has had this basic design flaw. Capping the round was not entirely to increase the effect against slopes but also to mitigate the round shattering on impact. This effect was well known to the British from experience in large calibre naval APHE. The shattering effect on early British rounds is a very different phenomena which was not a problem in later ammunition. I'm not saying it was common, in fact it was rare against American and British tanks due to the relatively light armour involved. But to state German ammo was immune to shattering is false.
  123. All APHE suffered from shattering, it was an inherent problem with the basic design. Capping the round helped but did not entirely solve the problem. Thr Germans did not develop super anmo
  124. The thing is, the British where very anal about getting reports right. They had a detachment in the 8th army who's job was to go and count tanks and measure shell impacts to figure out what killed them. This makes British reports rather reliable. Also there was no huge incentive to inflate kills as we didn't issue medals or lionise crews. It's just not something the British do, it's all about the regiment rather than the idividual. The Germans issued personal rewards for kills which made it more common to inflate. I'm not saying we didn't indulge in propoganda but it was of a different kind and the war office tended to fixate on accurate facts which they then suppressed till after the war.
  125. Yes and no Wiki is good for vehicle info, development details and so forth. Anything relating to individual people and it's pointless to rely on wiki.
  126. Level is no indicator of skill. I'm level 85 and only above average according to thunderskill
  127. Tier for tier, only tank I can not reliably pen is the Tigger2. used to have trouble with the churchill VII penning opponents, but since it's br reduction it's not a problem anymore
  128. Yesterday's oh so balanced T34 v PZIII was interesting. Whichever team had the most T34's won due to this new bug/ feature so as it benefits the Soviet slopes I dont see it changing might see more Brit tanks
  129. Despite playing Germans from tine to time, my main tanks are Brit. I cant help watching all this with a smug sense if satusfaction. Now everyone else knows how the Brits feel.
  130. I did notice this today trying that stupid chroicles event in my Panzer III
  131. So what, if anything, has happened to aphe exactly?
  132. You do know that ALL modern anti-submarine aircraft carry torpedos still right? Torpedo bombers where never phased out, torpedos became more advanced aircraft and helicopters took on anti-submarine roles with more modern torpedos. There is HUGE difference between hitting a carrier and hitting a battleship or cruiser due to the fact that carriers have these massive, easy to aim at, flat airfields on top of them. The profile of other ships is much narrower and harder to hit with bombs. Torpedos where the best option against large capital ships throughout the war.
  133. Another issue is WT only models vital modules. in reality there is allot of kit to absorb shrapnel
  134. Im getting tired if these arguments. Especialy with people saying "its like a grenade going off" A) grenades are not that powerful B) APHE is WEAKER than a grenade. Grenades are designed with a fragmentation casing or sleeve to spread the shrapnel properly. An APHE shell is a solid chunk of metal that does not seperate at a uniform rate as in frag grenades. The bigger the shrapnel piece the LESS damage it does and the lower the velocity. Much of the APHE's explosive force is expended in breaking the round so only a fraction is transferred into the velocity of the shrapnel.
  135. We had 25pdrs and 6pdrs on the back of trucks in north africa
  136. Probably thought it was hailstones
  137. My Wolverine and Achiles have both benefitted from this, survicing shots they could not of done. My achiles bounced s Flaktruck's 88mm a few nights ago, gave me chance to hose hom with the 50 cals
  138. Glorious APHE that is stock.... this is a major headache for me. I have Germans up to 5.7 and for most tanks all you need is the stock APHE
  139. Gaijin is as historicly accurate as Wargaming.
  140. I find that using a large booster 150+ seems to guarantee a city map for my British sniper tanks. Played the other day with my chieftain line up. 6 open maps in a row that let me hulldown and snipe, HESHdeath rained down upon the foe. Played a sesh of that pve mode and snagged a 500% exp boost. Activated and got that stupid all-city map with the falling buildings. Got roflstomped
  141. Killing level100 wanabe Wittmans is something I thrive on. as for spawnkilling, I've been on both sides often enough not to be too fussed
  142. Annoys me when the kids use words like "cancer" and "aids" to describe stuff in this game.
  143. Not everything worked to be sure We made up for it with Starstreak and Rapier
  144. Yup, people deride the British use of solid shot and HESH instead of APHE and HEATFS. The fact is they worked, Britain has always gone it's own way such as optical guidance for SAMs rather than radar or thermal. Doesnt mean our ideas are worse, in fact they are often proven to be highly effective. The British didn't need HEATFS as HESH does everything HEAT does AND everything HE does.
  145. The Conq is a valid third option at 8.0 if you can get hulldown
  146. Oh the fusing, that is a whole other source of rage.
  147. King George V class, always loved them
  148. Who uses APDS in a Chieftain? 120mm HESH will oneshot anything a Chieftain will encounter (with the sole exception of the Maus) while APDS will kill one crewman per shot.
  149. Yeah, atm the only Brit tanks I play on a regular basis carry HESH which is basicly British APHE, abuses the game mechanics the way APHE does. Solid shot is useable and if you are good, it can be highly effective but APHE doesn't need you to be good or accurate, it just needs you to pen centre mass. A British tank with solid shot will ALWAYS be at a disadvantage against an APHE tank.
  150. Yeah, it's only useful agsinst HESH and no Brit with any real experience will aim at your sides when he can just go for the turret or turret ring