IMO if HMS Glorious comes to 5.7, she should change her Mark XIIa APC with Mark Ia APC.
Not only Mark XIIa is shell that developed in interwar period so unlikely to be supplied to HMS Glorious(1919), but also almost 50% more explosive filler. Being a 5.7 ship, she usually doesn’t need such high penetration of Mark XIIa shell, rather need high damage of Mark Ia.
Many players just haven’t realised that since the DM changes implemented in Hornet’s Sting update Britain now has the strongest top tier BB line-up in battleship duels. It has 3 top competent ships (Rodney, Hood & Warspite), each of them being capable of singlehandedly taking down multiple 7.0 ships of other nations alone. Especially Hood and Rodney - these two ships are practically impossible to be sunk by gun fire if one plays them with proper tactics. There was no exaggeration - I haven’t died in Hood for a single time since December 2024, and only died in Rodney 3 times since Hornet’s Sting, of which twice were by Japanese torpedoes and once by a bomber.
However, that doesn’t mean they’re the most fun ships to play. The very slow turret training rate of the 15" ships and Rodney’s mediocre reload mean that they have limited tactical options. I often find that I get bored very quickly when playing the British top tier. Also they’re not particularly great at farming bots so I mostly focus on human players to remove threats from my teammates. Now I play them mainly for the sake of refreshing my personal records:
(The majority of my kills are human players)
Is there any information about the reliability of the ballistics of the 6’’ QF Mark 5N on HMS Tiger. They are almost impossible to use at distances close to 10-11 km and further, combined with the fact that the 3-inch shells disappear after ~9.5 km. Their dispersion is even worse than 5-inch shells with close muzzle velocities.
can i ask did you also recently get hms tiger as i got her during the gambling and i have had some terrible dispersion at times
I’ll look into it because the Tigers are missing a few features. It’s on the list of things to look at. Radars and FCS inaccuracy is also on the list.
No, I’ve had it for a year or two. I’ve gotten used to the oddities of its 6-inch gun, but recently the armor-piercing shells have stopped exploding. I’ve asked about this topic at various times, but I’ve never received any useful feedback. So I decided to try again.
Unfortunately I don’t have tiger because like most of the best British ships in their class it was an event….
But might as well kick up a fuss about it now. I’ll have to see if there are any more range tables available for post 1918.
Also might be worth re addressing Nelson’s reload and the reload of the British 15” too at some point now I’m back.
Thank you. Hope you bring some good news.
Get this man a true, UK top tier is great atm, but it can still get better :P
KGV and Vanguard when?
Even just a properly modeled rodney
high probability in this year
I suppose you are talking about NRB then. To play Tiger properly you need to learn NOT to hold your LMB on your enemies all the time. Hold your fire for the first few salvos to observe splashes and once you find the correct range, start to burst your machine guns. Besides it is very hard for 6" gun cruisers to hit anything with high manoeuvrability beyond 10km even for Helenas, let alone Tiger with only 4 guns. I would say the optimal distance is 7-9km especially if you want to kill destroyers.
My question is caused by the problem of dispersion on 6’’ guns. My accuracy is not consistent, but I have an understanding of the aiming mechanics. On classic British and Japanese cruisers I can hit at range of 10-15 km (in EC sank several ships at 20+ km), but regardless of the shooting technique on the HMS Tiger, the dispersion of its shells at these distances often exceeds the dimensions of the target ship. Considering the disappearance of 3-inch shells at these distances and the lack of damage from AP shells, duels with enemy cruisers at long distances are pure pain.
Maybe it’s not the problem of single shell’s dispersion but number of guns. When you have same dispersion, number of shell per salvo depends how much you will hit target.
For using HMS Tiger, I don’t recommend using it. It’s now same BR with HMS Invincible, and even without considering it, its armor is too thin to cover it’s shell room above waterline. If shell room divided into two and upper shell room can be empty it would be useful, but for now it is too easy to neutralize all it’s firepower by racking two shell room.
Though you’d figure that a 1960s would have better FCS and overall accuracy than a WW2 cruiser, but Tigers shell dispersal at medium range (8-10km) is woeful than even compared to say a single gun salvo on Belfast. So I dont think its volume of fire. The shell dispersal on the Tiger is just set to be much higher than that of any other 6" cruiser.
I bought it from the market about 6 months ago. Only played it a few times as it seems overtiered. But wow that dispersion. I thought I was just struggling to maintain a constant lead on the target but thats ridiculous. Can anyone look up the actual dispersion numbers in the files?
Yeah, I enjoy it, but its far from a competitive 5.7. I really dont understand why its 5.7 other than the fact its good at dealing with destroyers and especially anything coastal.
Its actually got a worse RPM to pretty much any other 5.7 light cruiser despite its reload rate and less armour as well.
and no, not something I can do, HK it probably the best bet for that, but something is definetly wrong with its shell dispersal
If I’m not mistaken, it is the “maxDeltaAngle” parameter that is set the accuracy of the guns. That is, among the six-inch guns with the lowest initial velocity (+ the american five-inch gun with almost no dispersion):
6’'/50 QF Mark N5 (HMS Tiger) - 50m horizontal and 32m vertical
“maxDeltaAngle”: 0.5
“maxDeltaAngleVertical”: 0.32
6"/50 BL Mark XXIII (Town-class) - 25m horizontal and 31.5m vertical
“maxDeltaAngle”: 0.25
“maxDeltaAngleVertical”: 0.315
6 inch/47 Mk.16 (USS Helena) - 24-27m* horizontal and 32-34m* vertical
“maxDeltaAngle”: [ 0.27, 0.24 ]
“maxDeltaAngleVertical”: [ 0.34, 0.32 ]
*(probably depends on shell type)
5 inch/38 Mk12 in Mk22 turret (USS Moffet) - 17m horizontal and 20m vertical
“maxDeltaAngle”: 0.17
“maxDeltaAngleVertical”: 0.2
p.s. I may have taken these numbers too literally, perhaps someone will correct me
And in addition stats of their shells:
6’'/50 QF Mark N5 (HMS Tiger) - 59.9kg and 768 m/s
6"/50 BL Mark XXIII (Town-class) - 50.8kg and 841 m/s
6 inch/47 Mk.16 (USS Helena) - 47.6kg and 812 m/s (or 58.9kg and 762 m/s for AP)
5 inch/38 Mk12 in Mk22 turret (USS Moffet) - 25kg and 792 m/s
p.s. AP of 6 inch/47 Mk.16 looks the closest to the HMS Tiger’s, but its dispersion numbers look much better
