As does most nations:
Britain air for example:
UK could also end up with twice as many BBs (if we include some refits) as the US in the long run as well.
3 Likes
eh i feel like your considering all the british battleships but forgetting about the many US battleships that existed as well
if the UK just had more BB classes youre right though, although some classes could get 2 of the same class due to refits.
we got like 3 possible Iowa classes alone, each different
Dont forget, the US only overtook the UK in number of active ships at the end of the war. for most of it, the US had a lot less than the UK
the UK could have 6 different Queen-Elizabeth class ships
but would there be any meaningful difference betwene them? there are still all the pre iowa 16in US battleships to add, each can get like 2 versions from refits, and the 3 iowa class, and then if gaijin blesses us with carriers, the US will be king in that aspect
no swedish submarine bc that thing had to be carried in the back of another ship to the excerciese
Well. You have the WW1 refits like Barham but @Tictaculer would probably be better for each of the different variants than me, but yes, varying degrees of armour and AA upgrades.
Then you also have Rodney and Nelson for 16" ships and the HMS Vanguard which would reasonably match Iowa as well.
If it sticks to mostly WW2 / just after WW2, then actually. Not really. Royal Navy Carriers were often better during WW2, featuring things like armoured flight decks. Its why UK ships were rarely damaged by Kamikaze attacks when the Pacific fleet arrived.
Its not until more like the 1950s that US carriers completely overtake UK ones.
we can get colorado, 1920 south dakota, North Carolina, 1939 South dakota, and iowa class
how does the armament and capacity hold up though?
UK can get
- KGV-class(1911)
- QE-class (WW2 Refit) + maybe a WW1 refit for the TT
- Nelson-Class
- Revenge-class
- N3-class
- KGV-class (1939)
- Lion-class
- Vanguard-class
and probably a few i’ve misssed
well the main examples of “big” refits that did not change the role of the ship would be valiant as it changed the superstructure and all of the secondarys along with the usual engine changes
the 6 that were actually made, yeah
It isn’t, though. There are many fourth gen airframes better than it.
Lion-class was laid down but canceled, fully addable in game.
im not saying UK BBs didnt get refits, but that Morvan initially failed to account for the pretty big refits a lot of US BB got for ww2
In any case.
“US gets more than the UK because it has more to add”
does not apply to naval.
UK has either more or equal to the US. and thats just looking at BBs
3 Likes
1 Like
true, at least for BB, but most of the examples of US getting stuff are not naval, and the US does just have way more stuff outside of naval
But not to say there arent as many additions possible. At top tier, maybe not, but they could probably add equal number of vehicles to most nations for the next few years without running out anytime soon.
If nothing else, many are misisng reasonably easy C&Ps like RAF Sabres or proper bomber variant of the Mosqutio
The excuse, US gets more stuff because it made more stuff, just isnt entirely fair. Especially when there is SOOOOO much missing
1 Like
well lets say they added one of the 15 inch armed ships each update since hood was added we would have only just run out
of battleships anyway, plenty of Frigates, Destroyers and Cruisers Id love to see
i mean i could make many arguments for the seeming forgotten US cold war jets and all the ww2 varaints present in other trees but not US,but yeah both tech tree misisng lot of stuff that shouldve/could come