The British naval ranks need back-filling from 7.0 with the QE and R class to things like the KGV 1911 at 6.7 and also the HMS Repulse.
Going forwards we have a touch of an issue. KGV’s armour is only beaten by Yamato, her guns are quite good. So effectively what you have is an unpennable ship with somewhat poor penetration but high damage. Nelson is much the same, she has fantastic armour, better than almost any pre-WW2 16-inch design and an extra gun over the ones who are about on par.
Vanguard is more Bismarck level (as is KGV 1938 to be fair), and then G3 and Lion’s (whether early or late war variants) are firmly in Iowa + level. It’s all pretty damn powercrept.
I suspect there may need to be a hard cap on ww1 ships an then another rank starting with things like Scharnhorst, Bismarck, Vanguard, KGV, Richelieu, Littorio and whatever US Standards fit the bill (SoDak or NoCal), then progressing onto things like 1936 refit Mutsu and SoDak (1920), Iowa, Nelson, G3 and Lion’s and then ending with the Yamato and Sovetsky Soyuz.
The issue is british 16 inch guns are good for long range diving shots but have poor flat pen.
The only exemption is the singular prototype gun made for the 1944-45 Lion class designs with a superheavy round which was longer and also a longer barrell with an autoloader. One naval historian i asked would have expected this to be fitted to the Lion 16E-38 design which is effectively a british montana class.
yeah i do find it odd just how slowly if you can call adding one ship in the past 2 years slowly at adding british high teir boats given just how many there are yet they have consistaly added boats to japan.
1.5 if you include Renown, but yeah, we need a lot more
not only agincour but also HMS Erin and HMS Cananda
1 Like
it would be nice to get a ship with better aa than hood but with better fire power than known as hoods aa is abysmal with how few guns it has
1 Like
This is the official rule, yes. It’s the most sensible place to draw the line in the context of ships.
So yes, Britain could get two (maybe three?) Lion-class ships, as well as one G3-class battlecruiser.
1 Like
man if only it had not been for the various naval treaties just imagine how large and powerful Battle ships would have become
Two laid ships, + one more on the basis of I think a singular prototype gun built specifically for the class. Wouldn’t be necessary unless the US got something like Montana’s.
or the yamato gets added which i feel they will do just because of how many people swoon over that ship probably only matched by people’s love for the bismarck
We dont really need new ships now,we just need to get people to play naval that aint chinese aimbot scripts.
3 Likes
Nothing can match the Yamato, which is a slight issue…
Some countries don’t even have designs on Yamato’s level.
The reason I suggest montana is that iowa and lion are roughly equivalent, whereas montana was never laid down and is a leap ahead of lion, which is balanced out by lion 16e-38.
i do agree that no ship that was ever made can match yamato it might end up being inevitable. and the problem that some ships never had ships that could match yamato even with paper ships is a thing that may just happen as nations like russia just did not have a focus on Battle ships and i am not super familier with non british paper ships due to kinda being a britt main in game and that is what i have put my time looking into.
well one of the ways they could do that is by adding more ships to the higher end and fixing the br’s by expanding them but they would have to do it slowly due to the low player count. and one of the things i have been thinking they could do is to make the aiming system look more like WOW’s aiming which i prefer in some ways.
That wont get people to play tho. Atm the most complaints are that the ships are boring for them. And the current aiming system is imo great and i dont want it changed.
ok then what do you think is a way to make it less boring and get people to play it. as the main complaint i have as someone who has recently gottent to the top of the british navel tree is the the sharnhorst is far to tanky compared to almost any other ship and that i don’t have enough compitant 7.0 ships in the british tree at the top end and i spawn hood 2 times most games then a pt if a cap is needed quickly
Nothing, people wont play something they find themself boring and uninterseting. Which ships are for majority of people playing WT, unlike planes or tanks.
well by adding more 7.0’s and above as i do think the br ceiling should be raised a small bit. you give people who have unlocked or gotten part way through trees a reason to keep playing navel as i am taking a small break from the grind as i have nothing to unlock and it seems like it will be that way for a while and some people might want to start playing navel to get their favorate ship.
Yes and no. Strictly speaking the Yamatos may be the “best”, but overall the Iowas are fairly comparable in terms that matter within WT.
Keeping in mind that the dev server is always work in progress, but take a look at Mutsu. I’m happy she’s here and this isn’t a complaint, but despite being our first 16" ship, her guns/shells seem rather similar to the existing 15" ones in the game. That is to say, the Yamatos’ 18" guns may not overshadow everything as much as some may think.
There’s also another interesting development. I’m sure most of us know that WT Mobile has a bunch of submarines and '30s/'40s battleships, and we’ll definitely see those over here eventually.
But recently-ish, two rather notable ships of a different type were added… added to the end of the tree, after the BBs: Hamburg and USS Belknap. Missile ships.
yeah i belive i had seen some where that the super shells on some american ships had simmiler raw penetraion to yamatos and would have a higher fire rate but lower post pen from said 16" shells but i have had some trouble finding hard stats on the penetration of the guns of yamato and the iowas.