where is my tirpitz better be a tech tree
1 Like
Armor is bad against 8.7, but not that bad against 7.0 ships when Mutsu appeared. We don’t have Rodney/Colorado even at that time, and it was when Scharnhorst was beast.
3 Likes
Cuz the ship sucks and shouldnt be as high as it is?
Gajin probably released the ships in the wrong order. Maybe Bismarck should have been introduced before Scharnhorst in her 1943 config. It also would have made sense if you consider the RL situation. Bismarck just sunk one BC and damaged a BB. While Scharn + Gneis sunk countless ships and took part in many naval operations. This indicates these were just better designs. Also the Gneisenau magazine detonation at Deutsche Werke dockyard in Kiel showed how sturdy the Scharnhost class was. The ship remained fully seaworthy. The turret was gone and the bow was burned internally. But still, other ships would have been gone entirely, like Hood, Roma, Arizona and so on.
Yep, I always thought Bismarck was more of a 1945 Nagato or North Carolina counterpart; and that, to counter Soyuz, Iowa or Yamato, H-39 was warranted… which apparently doesn’t have much better armor, but at least would have better firepower!
I hope H-39 eventually comes. If Soyuz could, there should be no issue at all with H-39.
Then argue for Yamato, Soyuz and the rest to go higher rather than Bismarck going lower. Same effect for your Bismarck but the early BBs will not have to suffer playing against it.
As always, Bismarck will be OP at first in terms of firepower and armor. Once most players have researched it and those who planned to buy it with Golden Eagles do so — we’ll get a nerf, and it’ll be crushed by the usual 1:0 kill/death ratio rule. I also suspect that in a year, Bismarck will go down in a single burst from some 1980s-era boat armed with ATGMs — just like it happens with heavy tanks at 7.7 BR.
1 Like
ATGMs will do bugger all to most Destroyers, let alone cruisers or battlecruisers.
If you actually want to deal meaningful damage to a large fleet asset with modern weapons you want either a large number of advanced AsHMs, guided bombs, modern heavyweight torpedoes (exclusively submarine launched) or a mixture of those three. Even then, only the bombs and torpedoes really pose a significant threat to a well armored battleship. A large number of AsHMs are pure HE or SAP-HE, with a focus on dealing massive damage to unarmored modern fleet assets and not penetration into heavily armored legacy designs.
This german persecution complex is hilarious in a naval context considering Scharnhorst has been absolutely overpowered for 2.5 years since its release 3.5 years ago, and even now after many nerfs is still well above average for its BR…
4 Likes
yeah thats why most people agree that Bismarck, Vanguard, Richelieu and Roma should have been added earlier. The current complaint is that none of these 4 (probably) stand a chance against Iowa, Yamato and Madeupsky Soyuz
Scharn wasn’t op anyways, with its low pen 28cm guns. Classical tradeoff low firepower, but good armor. While others had access to 36/38/41cm guns and obviously worse armor.
1 Like
Uh, Scharnhorsts was very OP before the update that added fire in the barbettes. Matches were literally decided on whose team had more scharns than the other.
You could literally sail into the enemys spawn and even at 3km cant do anything while you can happily snipe magazines.
7 Likes
They juat raised the BR by 1.7 (5 steps), thats the largest decompression theyve done in the history of the game. Theres such a thing as asking for too much
If people don’t focus Scharnhorst players down they still can do that regularly, the complaints I see about instant deaths from barbette fires do not line up with my experience while grinding my Kongous. It’s more like you have to pummel the hell out of their turrets and hope the game decides you hit the “Shinyhorse off button” hard enough for it to finally work.
3 Likes
fun fact during ww2 britain had 15 BBs 3 BCs 66 HC/LC 184 DDs
a 6 BB/BC ,13 HC/LC ,21 DDS hunted bismarck 6% of the largest navy hunted one boat
If they were to go full paper for the UK then yeah something like that would be a real upgrade. But honest N3 would perhaps be the best ship in the game? Rodney is not exactly horrendously vulnerable, some slight issues with flooding. But N3 wouldn’t have the reload issue.
G3 16.5" would be the best hope for something laid down before they adapted the design to 16" superheavy, and then lightweight 16".
If they were going for a design then N3 is the most real but L3 is my absolute favourite.
![r/WarshipPorn - British battleship design L3, discarded in favour of the unconventional M3 (with the x turret being amidships to save citadel length) which would later become N3. N3 would itself be cancelled due to the Washington Naval Treaty, with the O3 design (the Nelson) being built instead. [3351 x 2100]](https://preview.redd.it/british-battleship-design-l3-discarded-in-favour-of-the-v0-r0sazvy91ajb1.png?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=2bbadffb793730f7fa476c92393a484a8f59f907)
I suppose about as real as H-41.
1 Like
I think it very much depends on the ship doing the firing. If nothing else, at the moment, I now see Scharnhorsts as a free kill in the Rodney. Can usually take them out in my first salvo if I dont miss.
Yes and no.
Yes, Britain committed huge amounts of resources to physically find Bismark as that was 90% of the battle and whilst the first engagement didnt go according to plan for the RN. In theory Hood and PoW stood a pretty good chance against Bismark, just through a combination of bad luck and PoWs teething problems, the first battle was “won” by Bismark. If that engagement had gone differently. If the interception point had allowed the 2 ships to engage under more favourable conditions and if PoW hadnt been rushed into service before even her shake-down cruise (she had an inexpereinced crew and a lot of mechanical issues). Then that first fight might have gone differently
The second battle, the RN wasnt taking any risks and if you can completely outnumber the enemy, why the hell not leverage that advantage. Bismark attacking convoys or becoming another fleet-in-being like Tirpitz was simply not acceptable. (let alone getting revenge for Hood was a matter of national pride) She was being sunk, no matter the cost. So HMS Ark Royal (who, if i recall correctly. was faster than her escorts and risked leaving them behind so she could get into strike range) crippled her and then the battleships HMS King George V and HMS Rodney and the Heavy Cruisers HMS Dorsetshire and HMS Norfolk destroyed her.
Could KGV or Rodney taken her on one-on-one? Maybe, under the right conditons, but it was war, not an honourable dual. If the RN had had additional battleships, Battlecruisers or even additional cruisers available, they’d probably have joined the battle too (first one too)
1 Like
Gajin could have skipped Bismarck and directly went to battleship “H”. Similar rus got the Soyuz and Kron. Would have been more balanced, escpecially since Bismarck is so bad @ test server.
Agree. The commerce raiding is also reflected in game, just like losing bots, zones or smaller ships.
German ships like Scharnhost Graf-Spee and Admiral-Hipper is the most representative ships on commerce raiding in game. They have short reloading cannon, powerful torpedo, good armor and faster speed at the same time. if player don’t focus on them, they will quickly kill all weak ships and bots them losing score or the captured zone, they can even rush to the close range and drop the torpedo to kill heavy armored ship like Rodney.
So, technically Scharnhost is not such weak like they said. Most of the time, one match win or lose depends on whether sink enemy “rushing Scharnhost” at the beginning.