Britain Naval Tree - What’s left to be added for all BRs

[Rileyy3437]

I am not sure, if Repule wants to use that rear turret she must go more broadside, and therefore her 9" of armour (only over magazines also i think) is very vulnerable.

Though Dunkerque only has two turrets they are still better protected than Repulse (9" vs 13"), and just one of those turrets has the same guns as Renown does frontally, the shells admittedly are very poor with only 540mm of penetration though it is a SAPCBC round, it also is unaffected by the dispersion issues the 15" is, reload should be the same.

So Dunkerque is better protected with a worse layout internally but arguably superior firepower. Compared to Repulse’s advantage of very good magazine layout and bigger guns.

I think as a package Dunkerque might be better but we will have to see.

[Morvran]

Well, called it. They are too lazy to add an actual new ship to rank VI for us, so just a C&P event ship instead

[굴러온]

@Rileyy3437

So Dunkerque is better protected with a worse layout internally

No. even armor itself HMS Repulse is better than Dunkerque. Main belt is similar, and Renown&Repulse have way much better turtleback.

@Rileyy3437

arguably superior firepower.

Not quite sure for now. Dunkerque’s SAP has only 18 kg TNT filler, and we don’t know about dispersion of her gun yet. also reload is not sure. It’s design is 30 seconds, but what can she achieve throughout her lifetime was 40 seocnds(God bless that at least Richelieu class evade this fate with modernization). And even with 30 seconds, I’ll took hand of Renown&Repulse.

[Rileyy3437]

@굴러온

No. even armor itself HMS Repulse is better than Dunkerque. Main belt is similar, and Renown&Repulse have way much better turtleback.

I mean the turrets and barbettes are thicker, the bulkhead is stronger, belts are similar. I am not sure about the turtlebacks.

Admittedly this is before the refit but I remember the thickness values.

@굴러온

and we don’t know about dispersion of her gun yet.

It was on the russian stream, dispersion looked to be ~40 metres, they shot a full broadside and all rounds hit the destroyer.

@굴러온

also reload is not sure. It’s design is 30 seconds, but what can she achieve throughout her lifetime was 40

Yeah I didn’t catch that, we will have to see what reload they get.

@굴러온

And even with 30 seconds, I’ll took hand of Renown&Repulse.

We will have to see.

[굴러온]

@Rileyy3437

Admittedly this is before the refit but I remember the thickness values

This is 1921 version, but HMS Repulse still has this horizontal armor till her last as she didn’t get superstructure like her sister does. Also turret and bulkhead… well yes it’s thicker but 330 mm vertical(turret) and 228 mm(bulkhead) does not provide protection that is needed for 7.0 capital ships.

Especially with this kind of magazine yes…

[Tictaculer]

@Smin1080p_WT I know you don’t have any say in what gets added but how is this considered a 7.0 ship

[Tictaculer]

Also it will have to go before hood as it is worse in every way

[S3b5]

Hello gang
What is repulse

I think I documented it quite well in my suggestion

Renown-class Battlecruiser, HMS Repulse (34) - Qui Tangit Frangitur

poll poll poll HMS Repulse As Outfitted in 1941 [image] HMS Repulse in 1941, in her final configuration. Background HMS Repulse was the second ship of the Renown-class of battlecruisers. She was laid down on the 25th of January, 1915, launched on the 8th of January, 1916, and commissioned into the Royal Navy on the 18th of August, 1916. Her motto, “Qui Tangit Frangitur,” is Latin for “Who touches me is broken.” Built off of the Revenge-class battleships, the Renown-class battlecruiser…

If Repulse is supposed to be the 1941 version, she’s incorrect in various ways

• One extra triple 4" turret, there should be three, not four
• Missing 8 pom-poms, there should be three octuple turrets, not two
• Missing 2 Oerlikons, there should be 8, not six
• Missing 8 Vickers .50 cal, there should be 4 quad turrets, not two
• Presence of torpedoes, they were removed in the 1930s

[NOM1337AD]

is it possible that this is just earlier refit or is this configuration completely randomized?

[S3b5]

I haven’t seen the stream, only screenshots, so I am unsure.
But my first thought was a fictional 1945 refit but the torpedoes merely existing disproves that.

[굴러온]

It is. Modelling from dev-streaming seems like 1938 version. But if it is, then 6 Oerlikon 20 mm would be removed.

[Tictaculer]

So my view on this is that repulse is a step down from renown due to never receiving a major refit and as such ir should be a 6.7 because of this. But I am also trying to work out why she is only just getting added as we could have been receiving a battle ship almost every update since hood and only just be getting to the kgv’s

[S3b5]

No, the Oerlikons stayed until she was sunk. But if it is a 1938 version there should be no torpedoes

[굴러온]

I mean she doesn’t have Oerlikon’s in 1938. It installed after war begins. So if Gaijin makes statcards according to the modelling they have in dev server, Oerlikons’ should be removed.

[S3b5]

Ah, my mistake

[John_Sneeeeeeeew]

[FlyingOstridge]

Didn’t realise this thing was a think that existed

[John_Sneeeeeeeew]

I think the main issue I have with Repulse rn is the fact its 7.0, which is insane. It only has 3 main caliber turrets, somewhat below average armour and pretty limited AA.

There is no way Repulse is 7.0 material and at the same BR as, Hood, Barham and Renown, let alone ships like the scharnhorst.

I think even Renown should be 6.7, but Repulse 100% should be 6.7 or even 6.3.

[Rileyy3437]

I would put her at 6.7, particularly if her dispersion was accurate and Alpha was a bit more realistic.

[John_Sneeeeeeeew]

@Smin1080p_WT I understand dev stream battle ratings are up for changes but can I ask what the developers were smoking putting it at 7.0?

I would also like to ask if naval will be decompressed, I fell like if they even add a single br higher to 7.3 it would help a lot.

Poor guy is trapped in the tornado thread