man i just want a kgv like vanguard is cool but kgv would be different
2 Likes
KGV would be different but I think pen might be an issue though better than the Japanese 14" guns. Armour would also even that out but tbh Vanguard would do fine under that regard.
I’m just hoping that if they add her they do it properly as Rodney still doesn’t feel as strong as her armour scheme would suggest. Vanguard will have better internal layouts and the shells may even be on par if she gets supercharges.
Controversial but I hope Vanguard goes after Hood though. I also hope she is given the Battlecruiser title as she has so many parallels with Hood and also when launched the tabloids who were limited on information claimed the UK had launched a new Battlecruiser.
1 Like
i just hope they dont add vanguard after they started to remove some of the AAA mounts as she lost them over her lifetime but they were never replaced with alternatives like missiles or such
I would expect a '46 refit for when she commissioned or late 45 for when she left port/started sea trials, both are the same. I would also hope she receives all of the radars she carried, me and @DevilO6 found (more devil finding me interpreting if it was useful or not) some docs and advertisements on British radars, at in-game ranges I think it concluded with like sub-10 yard accuracy against capital ship targets on the surface radars. Also every single multiple bofors mounting had its own close range radar fire control which I want to see, and also each pair of twin 5.25" mountings in groups (fore port, fore starboard, rear port, rear starboard) had its own radar directors and guidance for both surface and anti-aircraft usage.
If they wish to add Vanguard this early then it should be emphasised that she was the last ever Battle-something (cruiser or ship take your pick) ever to be completed, and I wish to see the technological prowess emphasised here as a way of making sure she’s added complete.
Add her complete or don’t add her at all.
2 Likes
1 Like
He who hath found the sacred documents has been thus accredited.
2 Likes
They really are just allergic to giving us an r class
lets hope they add the HE-VT shells for the 5.25" guns
1 Like
Heya, how does the current implementation of XVIIb compare?
1 Like
On this topic, naval shell penetrations aren’t some unknown things, we should really just add them with historical trial results. It’s like using a formula for HEAT warheads based on warhead weight and diameter rather than using a primary source doc on say MILAN that says 530mm or whatever it is.
Particularly for us, that would be a lovely buff. And for any gun we don’t have data on, a fair guesstimation based on a better formula made with real life trial results would be good.
Giving HMS Vanguard this early doesn’t make me feel good though I’m Royal Navy lover. It’s not what GB naval needs right now, and just make me worry one of finest ship in tree lose it’s full potential.
What GB naval needs right now is 25 seconds reload for 15’’ and 30 seconds reload for 16’', not HMS Vangaurd. Already GB has good capital ship line-up in 7.0 with HMS Hood, HMS Warspite and HMS Rodney, which will be tanky ships even if they were not 7.0. But what they lack is firepower, especially on damage per minute they can give. If this is not solved, HMS Vanguard would be no meaning even if it added. It’s just replacement of HMS Hood or HMS Warspite.
Addition of HMS Vanguard this early also makes me worry about non-existence of supercharge ingame. It’s what HMS Vanguard would really need as it would be the one of end-lineup when all potential battleships were added in every nation. Without supercharge, 475 mm penetration at 10 km is problematic against latest capital ship added to each nation.
It’s just not time of HMS Vanguard. British needed buff of existing 15’’ and 16’’ ship, not new ship that has to be end of tech tree. I would rather want USS North Carolina at US tech tree, as USA is currently one of most suffering nation at top BR.
4 Likes
56kmh, shit load of radars, even bigger shit load of AA, vanguard looks pretty darn good actually.
I fully agree with everything you’ve said here. That’s what we really need and it’s kinda annoying that Gaijin haven’t moved in that direction
Vanguard managed to claw out 58.4kmh during sea trials but I’d much rather have her be a 30knot ship and at deep water load than a 32 knot ship and get a lower belt penetration
1 Like
Do we know how the paper g3 and n3 would hold up to a Yamato
N3 would be superior to Yamato except turret front armor, AA and speed
G3… will be little hard to fight against as it uses same AP with Rodney but will be decent if able to become close.
1 Like
Is my memory correct but during lions development post 42 were they planing on making faster fire rate turrets for the ship I remember hearing something along those lines a while back while watching one of drachinifel’s vids but it might have been one of the drydocks and I have no idea which one it was
1 Like
I’m afraid to ask where it will be superior to the battleship Yamato.
Similar gun power, both in penetration and after-pen damage(If considering SAP, much better)
better hull armor layout which doesn’t have cheek weakness of Yamato, and having straight forward bow bulkhead which is useful in angling.
And much better citadel layout, while Yamato has every shell room above waterline and one magazine near waterline, N3 has layout same as Rodney, which is extremely survivable.
Also, two torpedo tube.
C-doubtful, very doubtful…