WoWS: HMS Hood Stats

Major thanks to Urakaze for translating.

*Please note that the following stats are subject to changes before it is released*

-HMS Hood has the 15 inch Mk.2 guns compared to the 15 inch Mk.1 guns on Warspite, which has slightly better traverse speed and better penetration capabilities (better ricochet angles 55 degrees (chance of bouncing)/ 70 degrees (autobounce) ).
-The 178mm UP rockets only have 1.5km range, but benefit from large-caliber AA gun air defense captain skills.
-Hood has regular BB repair team and damage control party.
-Hood in-game has no torpedoes.
-The game gives conflicting values for Hood’s armour, especially citadel armour, hence the historical value is used for now.

Stats:
Ship HP: 67700
Deck Armour: 51mm – 76mm
Citadel Armour: 51mm – 305mm
Torpedo Protection: 16%
Max. Speed: 32 knots
Rudder Shift time: 14.43 seconds
Turning Circle Radius: 910m
Surface Detectability: 16.2 km
Air Detectability: 13.86 km

Main Battery
381mm/42 Mk.2 (4×2)
Range: 17.57 km
Reload time : 30 seconds
Turret rotation speed: 60 seconds per 180 degrees
Sigma: 1.8

HE Ammo: 381mm HE Mk.VIIIb
Damage: 5300
Velocity:731.5 m/s
Chance of fire: 34%

AP Ammo: 381mm AP Mk.XXIIb
Damage: 11400
Velocity:731.5 m/s
Penetration (at 5/10/15 km): 512mm/417mm/340mm

Secondary Battery
102mm/45 QF Mk.XIX (7 x 2)
Range: 5 km
Reload time: 3 seconds
HE Shell: 1500 damage
Chance of fire: 6%

AA:
102mm/45 QF Mk.XIX (7 x 2)
Damage: 66, Range: 5km

40mm Vickers 2pdr. Mk.VII (3 x 8)
Damage: 60, Range: 2.5km

178mm Unrotated Projectile (5 x 20)
Damage: 50, Range: 1.5km

12.7mm Vickers MG (4 x 4)
Damage: 8, Range: 1.2km

Misc.
Consumables: Damage control party, Repair team and Defensive AA-fire.

Advertisements

11 thoughts on “WoWS: HMS Hood Stats

  1. the 178mm Rocket AA is a bit of a disappointment with it’s poor range (wasn’t good historically either tbf.), and the stats overall feels mediocre at best. With the poor rudder and fast speed, I’m going to guess it’s going to play a bit like Iowa? With DF, perhaps an AA build would work nice, considering her 102mm secondaries don’t seem like anything to make a secondary build out of. the 1.8 Sigma is also a bit mediocre, Warspite seems better at it’s tier atm.

    Like

  2. Considering the poor ranged and the fact they’re 178mm, I would have hoped that the rockets would put out more damage…

    Like

  3. generally in that ship you dislike BB and like CA/CL (if you can hit them)

    (at 5/10/15 km): 512mm/417mm/340mm
    penetration as expected bit lackluster, countered somewhat by improved bounce angles, but don’t expect to citadel other BB past 13-15km
    in game penetration for other tier 7 BB
    Colorado: ~675mm/~560mm/~460mm
    Nagato: ~740mm/~590mm/~480mm
    Gneisenau: ~625mm/~510mm/~440mm

    about better penetration its primary bounce angles
    Warspite: ~530mm/~440mm/~360mm

    about armor, don’t dare exposing bordside to other BB, even some CA, 305mm belt + 51mm don’t stop to much and citadel is ABOVE WATERLINE BOTH AT MAGAZINES AND MACHINERY

    Like

  4. It might have less penetration then other tier 7s but with those values it wont overpen as much which is good im more worried about it sigma of 1.8. prepare rake cruisers at range.

    Like

  5. 17 and a half km range eh? so it looks like poor range is going to be the RN BB ‘thing’. It’s a damn shame as this looks like it will be eaten alive by all the other tier 7 BB’s, let alone higher tier ships. It would have been nice to give her a special repair/heal like the Warspite but it looks like we have to put up with Def AA as her special trick, which is entirely useless if the battle has no CV’s. With the Alabama and the Hood, it looks like WG’s current plan is “lets make the premiums as pedestrian as possible”, maybe this is because of the cries of prems being OP from the recent ranked season? I know for sure Hood won’t be used with these stats if they repeat another tier 7 only ranked season.
    Of course I’ll still end up forking over money for her, if only to look at her in my port and sigh over what could have been…….

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s