WoWS: King George V, Nelson, Lion, Conqueror Stats & Pictures

Advertisements

52 thoughts on “WoWS: King George V, Nelson, Lion, Conqueror Stats & Pictures

      1. Lion Tier 9 so Nelson tier 8. KG V is good where she is, she lacks the firepower for higher tiers (see Scharnhorst)

        Like

        1. I would make the HMS Vanguard the tier 8
          30 knots
          4×2 15inch guns
          8×2 133mm secondaries
          73 40mm bofors AA (only short-mid range, balances the dps)
          belt: 114-356mm (Bismarck: 320mm)
          turrets: up to 330mm (B: 360mm
          deck: up to 152mm (B: up to 120mm)
          the Vanguard at tier 8 is a Bismarck with slightly more armour, less AA coverage at long range (devastating AA mid range), less Secondaries and no torps
          you can forget torps since you don’t want to be close range with only 16x133mm guns

          Like

            1. it is the ideal ship for the tier, I guess the G3 battlecruiser design could work as well
              too bad since if you make a quick search of known british ships you can arrange 2 BB lines, 1 with slower but better protected ships and another with faster BBs with the inclusion of battlecruisers in the line

              Like

        2. Nelson would a joke at Tier VIII. If KGV lacks the firepower for that tier then so does Nelson. Just because they’re 16″ doesn’t mean they’re strong enough Tier VIII, especially with (I shit you not) 45s reload.

          Like

          1. The 16´´ were shit irl, true. But I guess for game design reasons they will not be that shitty, they will also be helped by the overmatch mechanics. (Reload is a balance factor to WG not a historical obligation)

            Like

            1. WG usually leaves shell weight & velocity at historical values though. The only times there’ve been fantasy shells is when they’re fired out of fantasy guns (like Izumo & Zao).

              Like

              1. Nelson is UP for tier 8, Lion would be OP (almost as armoured as the Montana), Hood is a premium, N3 would be OP in guns and armour (similar armour to Montana as well) but could only reach 23knt (DDs would feast on him), G3 battlecruiser would work well in armour and speed BUT with the same UP guns as the Nelson, HMS Vanguard is clearly ideal since it is on par with the Bismarck in several aspects, although it loses in secondaries and torps but wins in torp survivavility (305mm bulkheads with 356mm max belt armour)

                Like

      2. there was one Conquerer laid down for the Lion-class, and there was the so called Super-Lion-class with 18?inch guns right? is the conqueror the mix of the 2?

        Like

        1. Only two of the Lions were laid down Lion at Vickers and Temeraire at Birkenhead, Conqueror and Thunderer were supposedly ordered but never laid down all were cancelled when the slipways were need for convoy ships

          Like

      3. lion is t9, T8 should be The Vanquard in my opinion, the Caliber from the KGV are to Small, you wouldbnt penetrate a Hipper, Roon, Hindenburg or Des MOines /Baltimore from the front because of Autobounce.

        Like

      4. I prefer historical tree.

        QE – IV
        Nelson – tier IIV
        KGV – tier VIII
        Vanguard – IX
        Lion – X

        On tier 7 we already have Colorado and Nagato with 406, so why not Nelson ?
        I am sure there is no problem to balance 356mm in tier 8.
        But they did it with russian “logic” – bigger is better.

        Like

        1. Historical wouldn’t make sense here – you’d have to overbuff Vanguard and KGV to work. WG’s version will be more accurate in representing actual ship capabilities.

          Like

  1. So we have two from four recent leaks about June :)
    Soviet BB, new branch (British BB).
    So next – we can expect new free exp. premium and new (I suppose) premium polish ship? Maybe ORP Piorun (ship was mentioned in Bismarck campaign)?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Or they just reuse HMS Galland and will make it as ORP Garland ;)
      It is easy to make full line of Polish DDs, the problem is to add anything else than premium cruiser…

      Like

      1. Didn’t think about it, but yeah – you’re right, it’s much easier.
        Also that way can be made ORP Dragon (ex HMS Dragon) – it’s slightly modified Danae, which is already in game.

        Like

    2. The polish ships leak wasnt really a leak, it was just a possibility of more polish ships in the future
      And when wg says future you know they mean FUTURE
      Tbh i still dont care about any of these ships as much of the Roma, especially for being the largest and most powerful warship of her time, these are cool but they arent as cool as the roma :^V

      Like

  2. Wait what. A Tier X Battleship with only two guns in a turret? Didn’t they gave the Germans some fake three gun turret design because their tests showed tow gun turrets on Tier X suck?

    Like

    1. Not fake; it was a design sold to Russia when Russia asked Germany for 16″ design plans. Germany though continued to focus on left/right twin-turrets for convenience. As well, the reasoning for the triples was that the 16″ and 16.5″ options didn’t provide sufficient DPM in 8x format, so using the German-designed triples sold to Russia, was made into a German Montana.

      We’re dealing with 457mm guns; though 8x of them is potentially undergunned. It depends on how WG balances the rest of the ship. Assuming they use the heavier 18″ shell, that’s already slightly more Alpha than Yamato’s shells. There’s also the fact that WG can ass out a completely bonkers traverse speed of 30s with 30~35s reload on top of whatever equally ridiculous buffs they may want to give her, such as better rudder shift like Hood or RNAP, than can make her pretty broken despite 8x.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. No they did that because the German design with twin turrets was H-42 with 480mm guns. And 460mm is the maximum caliber WG will allow.

      Like

  3. Someone correct me if I’m wrong here, but the 457mm should do fuck all against bow tanking? The formula is (armor) x 14.3 = (minimum required caliber to overmatch). 32 x 14.3 is 457.6, aka you need 458mm shells to overmatch 32mm armor.

    TL;DR Yamato’s still the only ship with lolpen ability.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Yes, but then again, someone could wave a magic wand and change the formula just for RN BBs. You know, like what they’re doing now with KM CAs?

      Then again, rumor has it that RN BBs will get radar (which will do *sarcasm* wonders *sarcasm* for the game) so maybe not.

      Like

    2. Maybe the gonna do otherwise – and if HMS Conqueror cannot pen bow – then WG will give her the 40 mm of bow armor? So it also cannot be penned by Yammy?

      Like

    1. 4×2 you mean, 2×4 is the French battleship arrangement like the Dunkerque-class and Richelieu class. The number of turrets always comes first.

      Like

  4. Ah so we will get the originally planned KGV with the 15″ guns, nice.I really believe that this thing will be awesome at T7.

    Nelson will be T8 for sure, and if we take into account that it’s not going to have the problems it did in real life…i think it’s going to be very very good as well.

    I don’t like the other two though. Lion doesn’t look like a big upgrade from Nelson, and Conqueror has only 8 guns at T10?Not good, unless it has superb accuracy and very good ammunition.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. there are other problems with Nelson:
      1 not prettiest protection 330mm belt with machinery spaces above waterline.
      2 ship guns suffered from to light shells for their caliber with harmed penetration power.
      3 slowest of all tier 8 BB at 23kts

      about Conqueror its bit hard to tell, if we go IRL path then it isn’t too good:
      1 guns are pretty old at ~1920
      2 they suffered the same issues as nelson guns: to light shells 1323kg for 1 and 1287kg for 2 design
      in mean time Iowa: 1225kg, Yamato 1460kg
      with means not best penetration potential, still that guns will gonna hurt badly cruisers.

      Like

        1. only even older shells were heavier than Yamato (1506kg), but old design didn’t had any decent performance.
          Warships Volume III gives 457mm at 13720m, but don’t state anything about muzzle velocity or penetration standard.

          Like

      1. 1)North Carolina doesn’t have any armor either, yet it’s doing pretty good. At least i am enjoying her.

        In fact, Nelson has better armor and possibly an overall better armor layout design. Not to mention she has the advantage of bow-on fighting. So, more armor,easier to angle and bring all guns to the target…..Hell it looks really good man.

        2)They’re still heavier than the German ones (to my knowledge). If there’s an issue the devs could simply buff penetration. It’s a video game after all. We’ve seen them do it many times.

        3)Speed is overrated really. Does New Mexico suffer because it’s slow? Keep in mind that this ship will be stationary most of the time. The playstyle of Nelson will be the same as Yamato and Dunqerkue.

        You also have to keep in mind the way battles progress at this tier. They’re much slower than,say…tier 6. There’s more camping and slow cruising than going full speed into eachother. So speed is not a problem either. Hell speed can get you in trouble sometimes.

        I think Nelson will be one of the best at it’s tier.

        Like

        1. Except Nelson has far worse speed/AA/gun performance than NC and is much slower than the germans which make up for their garbage (at tier 8) 15 inch guns with strong secondaries, turtleback armor layout, excellent speed and hydro/torps.

          Like

        2. to be sad by game standards NC have bit better armor citadel is at waterline (Nelson have it above waterline like current Iowa) and it have 38mm weather deck (resistant to 152/155mm IFHE and 203mm HE) on Nelson i didn’t saw any protection for weather deck
          while frontal firing angles are somewhat better (angled NC is still perfectly fine) you don’t have much on the rear.

          2) its more caliber to weight ratio + shell design, like Iowa 1225kg 406mm shell with have similar performance to Yamato’s 1460kg 460mm (still in game Yamato gets lolpen due to 14.3x rule)
          Nelson 16inch performance wasn’t best with was know at that time it even had proposed to get new heavier shells, but that was canceled.
          most guns in game keep their penetration potential

          3) speed is always good to have it allows you to more effectively respond to changes on battlefield, along with caching up to enemy or getting out of the trouble. if speed got you in trouble its more your own fault.

          about best 8 tier BB its really hard to point out any bad tier 8 BB, all of them are pretty solid.

          Like

          1. Man you keep talking and talking about historical statistics and characteristics. I told you and i say it for the last time,it’s not real life… it’s a bloody game. If something isn’t working, they will fix it.

            Iowa got her citadel “fixed” yes? It’s now unhistorical but nobody will complain again,problem solved. What makes you think they won’t do the same with any ship that has the same issue? What makes you think they haven’t done it already for many ships? Well..shit, they have. So calm your tits down.

            Speed, again, it’s not important mainly because of of the arrangement of the armament and the “meta”. This ship will play exactly the way Dunkerque and Izumo (said Yamato before, my mistake) play,we all know this.

            Every rock on this planet knows that speed is in fact not important for those kind of ship. They just park around the corner and either go slowly forwards or backwards angling slightly left or right only to bring all their guns on the target. It’s a god damn fact.

            And yes it’s your fault if speed gets you in trouble but in this game it doesn’t help you get out of trouble either. There will always be a cruiser that will catch up to you and will probably burn you in the process.

            Speed really isn’t that important.
            Would Gneisenau be so much worse if it didn’t go faster than 25? I seriously doubt it. Is New Mexico or Colorado garbage because they’re so slow? Absolutely not.

            In the end, maneuverability and acceleration is FAR more important that raw top speed. I’d rather be slow but maneuverable enough to slalom like a dolphin and evade torps all day long, than be able to catch up with cruisers but not being able to turn when needed.

            Like

            1. calm down sir.
              its a game, but games also have set of rules with they follow, im talking about historical parameters with apply to this game and penetration characteristics are mostly keep in check, they more like alert other parameters.
              still there are few exceptions like “premium ship no nerf” (Murmansk), or for “fake” gun like ones on Izumo and Zao.

              Iowa/Montana/Missouri citadel is special case, now we talk about how citadel is modeled in game
              one most: Main ammo magazines, Machinery. in case of above ships its below 3 deck so by in game standards its bit odd to have it higher. only ship with similar issue is Yamato, but that’s more price for having “lolpen” guns

              that if speed is important depends on way in with you play ship, while i don’t own neither Izumo on Durnkerque i don’t see them neither in game or on some channel them “camping” and they use their speed.

              its not about “cruiser will catch up” not every map is ocean there are places were you can break line of sight, there are also “teammates, cough cough” and you still keep more speed when maneuvering.

              New Mexico and Colorado are one of my favorite ships…, but in them i know that with ever side i chose there’s no return back they don’t have speed to waste time maneuvering around map.

              then why not complete package: NC/Alabama with have all three: speed, maneuverability and acceleration…

              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