And it’s make-believe paper navy
1 Like
How to contradict yourself in one sentence.
The Scharnhorst used to be OP, but it’s not even close to as bad as the Soyuz.
1 Like
No it was more terrible than Soyuz. At least Soyuz can be a easy kill when showng full broadsde, Scharnhorst wasn’t.
As Scharnhorst was, new ‘mechanism’ to counter X makes only other ships more painful. No need.
What need is simple. Closer spawn range. Drastic decrease in player number of Naval Realistic clearly shows that longer spawn range was a huge mistake made by Gaijin, just hearing some non-naval player or don’t know what they were saying in forum. As long as Soyuz stands in a distance where her flat, fast velocity gun shines and she couldn’t show her broadside easily, nothing will change.
1 Like
Not for long. there were lots of vehicles that could pen the Scharnhorst out realtively shortly after it’s release. Now it just gets graped by the big boys. It’s also a real vehicle and it’s guns have terrible post-pen damage, while the Soyuz has a unrealistic to the point of being impossible amount of filler in it’s unmatched penetration shells. not to mention that the Soyuz was actually impossible for the russians to build, but gaijin isn’t biased at all, inspite of all the evidence and comments from their staff.
1 Like
Could pen =/= could give critical damage. It’s turtleback make it’s invulnerability for years. Only at this year barbette fire makes her vulnerable.
blah blah blah(giving no accurate report or document that USSR can’t build such ships)
Anyway, as a person who plays battleship since it’s first introduction. It’s funny to hear some saids Scharnhorst was not as OP as Soyuz. Being undetonatable for more than two year, being the most fast ship and compensating low penetration with fast firing gun and superior manuverability, Scharnhorst was more than what Soyuz is right now.
Oh, i didn’t realise that you had no integrity, my mistake.
The USSR didn’t have the capability to produce armour plates of that size, thickness or quality. also the gun’s were well beyond their capabilities too. Keep hiding behind your ignorance.
They were both OP, the difference is that the Soyuz is entirely a construct of fiction while the Scharnhorst was a real and powerful ship.
1 Like
It’s not a battlecruiser. Scharnhorst is a fully fledged battleship by 1930s/40s Germany’s definition. There’s a reason it’s known as [battleship Scharnhorst]
But semantics.
No, it was considerably worse pre-leviathans because you’d 9 times out of 10 spawn within range of it being up your ass and with how bad the average naval player is, usually took the entire team to bring a competent Scharnhorst down with any sort of speed. This is not an exaggeration or hyperbole.
Or you got lucky with secondary SAP as a russian dreadnought and unrepairable flooded him out.
At least you can pop a Soyuz like a balloon at 15km with a Yamato. [If you’re not erased from nearly 18km away by SAP in return].
They would have just substituted the plates. It would have resulted in worse protection (as stated for the umpteenth time in this thread).
Which would have been a great way to balance the ship but for some reason what we have in game is the cope thickness for the worse plates but with full rca quality armor
Besides that it faster, have good AA, descent torps and fastest reload.
And shells attracted to magazines before it was nerf batted in Leviathans.
Try to bow tank now within 10km? Instant detonation. Try to fight at range? Shells through the barbette and down the elevator, which equates to either instant death via fire or mag det.
I agree Scharnhorst needed a nerf but Leviathans may have been a bit much. At least Mutsu is probably the scariest thing to see in the 7.0 bracket now. [Like it should be].
Edit
Yes, I know Mutsu is 8.0 but the damn thing is a surface monster.