Well I kinda got lucky I played 1 game of her after buying the ap round and only got hit by the odd ai ship but I hope they manage to fix her by the time I get back from Christmas activities. I know they won’t but one can hope
I think it may be time to accept that the British naval trees peaked 900 days ago with the addition of hood and it wouldn’t change till vanguard which they will some how add alongside Yamato and call them equals
1 Like
Nah, it will take 2 years for Vanguard to get 6chr rounds. She’ll just be Hood 2.0
shell room and magazine swapped last minor update, still nothing wrote on changelog?
Then why did changelog need? And well DS steel and reload is still problem.
2 Likes
Armour was also completely reworked.
Does anyone have som pics of pree change armor
Still not fully done. Still left hull DS steel.
DS is regarded as structural steel.
Oh you were the bastard capping zones.
Its so dumb that a coastal boat can win a 7.0 game single-handedly
3 Likes
It should not be, considering its characteristic and some ships’ DS is in armour as RHA
1 Like
hmmm what version is it reworked on?
I have just loaded up and the magazines are still above the shell rooms
Same on Mutsu here; it is very often that I die “Drowned” over loss of buoyancy due to unrepairable breaches even with +60% of the crew still alive.
In the best case scenario, I may survive unable to move, aim or shoot at 11% buoyancy or something like that.
I, for one, would be happy if loss of buoyancy gained relevance indeed if at least Gaijin removed the shell room artificial nerf, which makes me depressed to remember every time that it’s INTENTIONAL by them for “gameplay purposes” (ruining gameplay is an actual purpose it seems).
1 Like
U.K and U.S both.
It’s funny how USSR, the WORST of the real life navies found ingame, is probably the second best ingame after Germany (or third after Japan)- while U.S and U.K, first and second best in real life respectively, are among the worst in War Thunder due to their implementation…
4 Likes
I see you in my game :)
What I’m most confused about with Rodney flooding, is that a breach in the bow, causes flooding across 50+% of the ship. Were there not any water tight compartments in Rodney’s bow?
1 Like
Should be plenty, i believe she was hit in the bow during her career and she was perfectly fine
Yep, but of course it would be unfair to model that on Rodney. Just had another game. 1 unrepairable breach on the bow, insantly drop down to 35% buoyancy and had 2 minute reloads on the front 2 guns.
Have you guys tried going reverse so most shells hit the super structure
Is it just a bug with the stat card not listing its torpedo protection?
It famously had good protection, and also was controversial because of it. They didn’t count the weight of the water used to flood the protection system in the total displacement, so they were technically “cheating” according to the limits of the Washington Naval Treaty.
It also seems to just be completely missing any internal watertight bulkheads.
“The general principle was the US-inspired “all or nothing” with in unprotected areas, still the addition of many thin layers. Protection was generally internal, which was its main feature, using deflecting and non-straight surfaces. The belt was invisible from the hull externally. On the other hand for the first time, they had an excellent vertical protection, with sloped transitions to counter plunging parabolic fire and aerial bombs. The external hull of the ship was unarmored but fitted between the hull and sloped armor by large internal longitudinal torpedo bulges which can be fill in part, rising the displacement. The idea was a layered defense which would initiate detonation, exploding outside the armor itself, like a modern add-on armor.”
The absence of external torpedo bulges had two faces: On one, it made the hull much cleaner and benefited speed. On the other it reduced internal space, much to the annoyance of engineers tasked to fit in the large machinery. The ASW protection was also layered and was similar in design and effectiveness to HMS Hood. It was calculated to withstand a 750 lbs (340 kg) TNT warhead.