Anyone think its worth putting a load of effort to see if we can get HE-VT on things like HMS Renown and HMS Warspite given that they now face jets?
and does anyone know if Rodney and/or Nelson would be included in that?
4 Likes
I think yes the effort should be made
Nelson yes but I believe it already has he-vt for the 4inch
(The six inch shouldn’t have them since they weren’t dual purpose armerent)
But read up on the adoption date again and then check with the ships version year in game before you put effort into that
4 Likes
I’d argue that wouldn’t be need, gaijin already give the Americans, Soviets & British HE-VT ammunition for ships losted before the adoption of said ammunition, interesting to hear those ships don’t carry the shells already.
1 Like
Gaijin seemingly ignores dates when it comes to HE-VT, only taking in to account if the guns could fire the ammo if available even if it’s years later on another platform.
I tried to get HE-VT removed from Moskva as she was sunk June 41, before even the first US ship testing of, and a decade prior to the Soviets having the shells available in quantity…unsurprisingly it didn’t occur (to be fair Every single naval related suggestion was ignored during the BR rebalance! ).
I have no problem with ships getting ahistoric VT to make them more effective, but in the case of Moskva it’s not tweaking history a year or two but a whole decade. Plus she already has very effective secondaries and extra firepower isn’t needed. For most other anomalies it’s a decent balance, especially where AA options are otherwise very weak.
2 Likes
Given how bad Moskva is in general due to ship layout, it needs all the help it can get.
Another prime example of Gaijins extremely loose rules to HE-VT availability, and showing it not as simple as ‘Russian Bias’, is USS Bagley (DD-386).
She is clearly mounted with Pearl Harbour period weapons only with secondaries being 4x 12.7mm, not an emergency fit of 20mm or 40mm in sight.
So clearly if the guns had VT at any point of their lives they should receive them according to Snail logic.
I have no problems with Moskva layout besides having to angle more to get the 5th main in play. If you go full broadside you have the full load plus 76mms to add to the firepower . The secondaries are more than good enough to handle the majority of planes and boats meaning you can concentrate on DDs.
I basically ignored her after spading, but after BR rebalancea and having enough 4. 3s to make two lineups, I unboxed her and am having great success.
Small destroyer with atrocious ammo layout. While most destroyers don’t take kindly to any sort of fire, Moskva seems especially prone.
Yeah, wasnt thinking for the 6", only the AA guns, but its annoying that their shell type isnt listed anywhere I think.
Holy fuck.
That looks incredible, I think this might be one of the Portsmouth isle of wight hoverctafts?
Yes it’s from the hovercraft museum in gosport
Did some looking up, is that the BH.7?
Yes or at least a variation of it
Kinda surprised by the lack of hovercrafts, that be a tricky thing to add currently but once MM.38 start flying that may one day come (along with the Type 143 getting theirs or a few Type 12I’s for Britain packed with MM.38, gods why does the model version get one already???).
The Project 1238 suggestion did just past to the devs, so maybe hovercrafts in the future?
hopefully, just wonder where they would go? i would think coastal tree
Probably. Might make a good alternative to hydrofoils for our TT, but tricky thing to place and balance
true but im sure it will be fine
Imagine how pissed you’d be when you launch a missile at the enemy BH.7 but it then just goes onto land and hides behind a hill.
1 Like
i would find that very funny and laugh at first lol, if it kept happening then i might get pissed