Thanks for the document drop-in haha.
Do you know what the current dispersion values are roughly or is it best for us to just do a surface firing trial with 1 turret from tiger?.
Tbh, after readind this i realised the Cumberland reports might not give the full picture.
As they said themself they kept range spotting to minimum, and as the report itself state, the Tiger accuracy might have been better.
Well if it worse we can report regardless impyling it should improve upon Cumberland and if its better we can at least buff it down to that level.
The SAP might have had a higher % of AP capping and therefore Gaijin reclassified it as AP. Kinda the inverse of what happened with the Dunkerque’s AP shell.
1 Like
I have not preformed any tests, but based on pure in game feeling, hit rates seems better than the tables. But it might be just my feeling
Something quite interresting i have just read:
The 6inch Mk XXIII tripple mounts (the ones the later town classes used) were not the last tripple mounting built.
In 1942 another mount was designed, based on the Mk XXIII, which was called the XXIV. The main differences were powered loading, RP.10 remote power control and 60° of elevation.
These mounts were planned for Tiger, Bellerophon and Defence with Blake and Hawke being ordered a bit later.
Now to the fun bit: after most of those ships were cancelled, the admirality still ordered for most of the mounts to be completed and then stored.
So with those ships being laid down and the gun mountings being completed would this make them applicable for introduction into the game?
Would depend if we can find some pictures
https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-1149512
for the Mk 26 mounts this migth have the gunnery trial reports in them (Tigers were done in 1959)
There were some designed and possibly made for the Minotaur class. And those were laid down
Okay so Wargaming also announced Arkhangelsk
And uses wrong turret modelling of what War Thunder used. I’m surprised that both game still share their modelling.
What’s wrong with it ?
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/DyNUCfrblBaS
Somebody just found out that Gajin reuses 3D assets (which is completely fair for a game of this size)
QE and R class battleship’s turret is not fully rounded on front, but isosceles trapezoid front with rounded corners. Ingame HMS Barham is with correct modelling, but Warspite and Arkhangelsk uses wrong modelling, which is basically re-using of Renown’s one.
Ahh I see,
She also uses Mk 1/N mounts in game which none of the R class ever received
dont worry, they’ll be 7.0
You can partially relax. That list is confirmed fake.
Though doesnt mean we wont see new meta ships next major update
well this is what some people are thinking from the QnA they put out
2 Likes
Yeah, its possible. Vast could also be Vanguard. (Fast Vanguard = Vast)
um but i dont really want another 15inch BB give me a late war kgv