heavy lion class design design could counter iowa and be a tough ship for yamato.
2 Likes
Lion class would be tough as other british battleships, but also suffer low penetration and short fuze as other british battleships.
2 Likes
Heavy design would have the thickest armour in the game and a new 16 inch was intended iirc but even still I’d be happy with Nelson’s guns.
Quick spec comparison (updated)
| Feature | Heavy Lion (1942 — your numbers) | Yamato (actual) |
|---|---|---|
| Deep displacement | ~97,000 t | ~72,800 t |
| Length | 1,000 ft | ~263 m (≈862 ft) |
| Speed | 31.5 kn | ~27 kn |
| Main armament | 9 × 16″ (406 mm) Mk II (same as before) | 9 × 18.1″ (460 mm) Type 94 |
| Belt armour | 18″ (you supplied) | ~16″ |
| Deck armour | 9″ (you supplied) | ~8–9″ |
| Turret armour | (same as original Lion design: much less than Yamato’s 25″ faces) | up to ~25″ on turrets |
| Range/endurance | likely very long (huge displacement = larger bunkers, stores) | ~7,200 nmi @ 16 kn |
VS Iowa class
1 Like
N3 won’t. Your best options are one of the Lion class designs (16E-38 is particularly promising with 12 guns but would still have poor pen). Or G3, which you can consider as a better Nelson with 16.5" guns depending on which configuration Gaijin pick, G3 would also definitely have the standard British reload of 26-30 seconds.
I believe the 16.5"s would have the most penetration in-game for British vessels, but it’s still not incredible levels of pen.
I did however read that the Nelsons had their shell velocity reduced after a while due to barrel wear. It’s possible we could see their penetration therefore improved with higher shell velocity if gaijin ever choose to reevaluate them.
The 16.5’s were only an early proposal weren’t they? So if the G3’s were ever laid down then it would have been with 16" as the intended armament?
Looks at Krontadt, Soyuz, Genesinau and Sevestapol stats
1 Like
It’s hotly debated. We know the final configuration ever completed was a 16". We also know the first was a 16.5". The timeline as for the reductions is the iffy part.
For example there was also a 16" superheavy gun designed for them. But we know the final gun was the same as the Nelsons.
They also found the 16.5" turret could be reused for a twin 18" turret (people said the 16", this is apparently wrong).
Given the frankenstein levels of mixing configurations on Kronshtadt particularly, I am very much hopeful Gaijin will give us the 16.5". Kron has mixtured of main battery, with AA dual batteries which were never merged. Taking parts from Pr 69 and Pr 69i
I also have naval Historian Dr Alexander Clarke saying they were 16.5" weapons and were only reduced at the end of the WNT debate in a last ditch attempt to be allowed to lay them down.
Those guns were built, the 16.5" was never built - not even a test barrel.
Only by us keyboard warriors AFAIK - I’ve never seen anything from any source even remotely suggesting any 16.5" guns or parts of them even started being manufactured.
The ships themselves were laid down for the intended armaments they have in WT, or in the case of Gneisenau the upgrade was “ready to go” in 1939.
I’m not interested in all the “the USSR could never have completed them” whiney drivel - in this case they meet WT’s stated rules for ships and that’s all there is to it as far as I’m concerned.
If Gens and Seves can have 22.7 second reloads instead of the accurate 70+ second reloads. Britain can get its 16.5" guns instead of the 16" guns.
1 Like
I’m referencing that the Project 69 configuration Kronshtadt has the upgraded radars, FCS stats and dual purpose armament that came with the upgrades to project 69I as you’d see on Selvastopol. Additionally morv has reminded me of the lack of power loading in the autoloaders of the 15" german ships bar bismarck.
I don’t think the solution to the USSR couldn’t have completed them stuff is to add more like them. It’s just to reflect the historical considerations in the SS design, which would make it on par with Iowa and much more manageable and better for the game overall.
1 Like
Are you confusing with World of warships or something? Sevastopol in War Thunder doesn’t have upgraded radars, german made FCS, and same dual purpose 100 mm that is actually used by both navy and army during WW2 and still today(yeah, t-55 guns)
After having played this ship in more than a dozen maps, I realize and have to admit I was wrong. Its not the incorrect gun penetration, incorrect armor, or draft height that is the main issue with this ship. Its complete totally made up and BS ‘sinkablity’ mechanic that allows a ship that has one of the most extensive external hull protection systems ever put to sea to be easily and rapidly sunk by massed light gunfire. This is one of the most pitifully wrong stupid and pathetic examples of ship ‘development’ I have witnessed in 25 years of gaming. Not even worth playing anymore at this point, I regret every single penny and every single minute of time I ever put in to this sorry game.
2 Likes