9x16" 50 caliber guns in three gun turrets
20x5" 38 caliber guns in ten dual purpose mounts
76x40mm guns in various mounts
56x20mm guns in various mounts
that would be Admiral King's doing, if I remember right from Drach's video.
There were some issues with AA systems being outdated, so he had one of his characteristic autism attacks and did his usual frantic micromanaging-full-redesign screamfest.
He also needed to update the warplans stored on one battleship because the only plan it had for enacting was a plan to invade mexico.
missiles serve the same purpose as battleship main guns (plus anti-air). It's practically the same thing.
It's why the eternal "bring back battleships!" argument makes no sense, because dude they already exist.
Missiles are slow and can be intercepted and take up a lot of space. They are not the same thing as having a really big gun, even if it's not practical to use a really big gun on a ship anymore.
What do you mean you don't like meaningless AA failing to shoot down planes that respawn anyways? Would a Gato class that moves faster than a fricking Seawolf ease your mind perhaps?
if i wanted to play planes i would play war thunder, why cant we have nothing nice
4 months ago
Anonymous
Why don't you play boats in WT? I quit WoT when it became math shit with guns. Like X tank does Y damage and tank Z has Q HP. When I finally got the FV2105 183mm (the proper non made up tank) and it was barely doing any damage and the game still had shitty players ramboing their medium tanks solo instead of wolf packing up or moron heavy tanks camping in spots meant for SPGs/TD's and needing Gold ammo to do really well. Went to WT and while it has shitty bias, it is at least more fun with meme tanks.
I disagree. I love playing subs. I can pretend to be Marko Ramius and sometimes i mutter to myself in a sloshy scottish accent while giving orders to my nonexistent crew
Arsenal ships like this are a stupid concept.
One of the big advantages of VLS is that it allows you to distribute your firepower over multiple ships to allow for increased survivability and versatility.
pre fire-control revolution: more smaller guns to overwhelm the enemy at close range
post fire-control revolution: fewer large guns to make the most out of their range
Depends on the timeframe.
Pre-dreadnought, more smaller guns was better.
For the Dreadnoughts with rangefinding equipment and a centralized fire control system, more big guns is better.
The RN considered six guns to be the bare minimum, becasue you needed that many shells splashes to refine your solution.
8 was better, 10 was ideal, but more than 6 turrets often resulted in confusion.
That may have been due to the RN not really liking HMS Erin and Agincourt.
The US and Japan managed to make their ships with six turrets work well enough.
I used to love wows, but the power creep and at refusing to accept that carriers fundamentally break the game's design ruined it for me. The carrier rework just made it worse and then they actually added subs.
With drones as prevalent as they are. If we had modern versions of these except every gun was radar controlled for anti-drone that would make these pretty useful in a battle group
oh look its a false dichotomy thread
Few small cannons, lots of missiles.
A single super heavy cannon firing millions of super small projectiles with each volley.
Like a 10,000mm gun firing birdshot at relativistic speeds.
The peak of weaponry would be an electrostatic accelerator/dust gun that shoots uranium fast enough to split the particles on impact
Nuclear birdshot sounds dope. Would hunt squirrels with it and then post to /k/.
>HMS Incomparable
Say what you will of the bongs, they comes up with the best names for their ships.
Are you sure about that?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay-class_patrol_boat
They’re just being honest.
>best names for their ships
>ships
>posts a boat
KYS
It's a paper ship.
Also, Jackie Fisher pls stop.
That's a Wargaming created name because they gave it a funny camouflage and captain, nothing at all to do with the Royal Navy
Is that some Captain Scarlet/Stingray shit?
Both.
9x16" 50 caliber guns in three gun turrets
20x5" 38 caliber guns in ten dual purpose mounts
76x40mm guns in various mounts
56x20mm guns in various mounts
was the absurd amount of secondaries and aa on the iowas done in anticipation of how things were going, or just a happy coincedence?
that would be Admiral King's doing, if I remember right from Drach's video.
There were some issues with AA systems being outdated, so he had one of his characteristic autism attacks and did his usual frantic micromanaging-full-redesign screamfest.
He also needed to update the warplans stored on one battleship because the only plan it had for enacting was a plan to invade mexico.
Smaller is always better
Warriortard will never stop being a dribbling autistic mong and "he" will infect all threads.
Missiles
> B-but...
*Sinks you from over the horizon before you even realize what's happening*
Despacito
Missiles will job to lasers eventually
>jobbing to an LOS limited weapon
Nah
They will but not for ships on water, it will be used in space. Everything else is too slow compared to light out there.
missiles serve the same purpose as battleship main guns (plus anti-air). It's practically the same thing.
It's why the eternal "bring back battleships!" argument makes no sense, because dude they already exist.
Missiles are slow and can be intercepted and take up a lot of space. They are not the same thing as having a really big gun, even if it's not practical to use a really big gun on a ship anymore.
Few big cannons firing many small cannons
Big canons shooting drones which shoot missiles
Aircraft Carrier with AA/ASW ships as support.
Why not do both?
Meant to post the Bouvet. It had a primary, secondary, tertiary, quaternary, quintenary, and SENARY battery.
>2 × 305 mm/45 Modèle 1893 guns
>2 × 274 mm/45 Modèle 1893 guns
>8 × 138 mm/45 Modèle 1893 guns
>8 × 100 mm (3.9 in) guns
>12 × 47 mm (1.9 in) 3-pounder guns
>8 × 37 mm (1.5 in) 1-pounder guns
Man I just couldn't do WoW anymore. At least WoT has SPGs for when I want my artillery fix but BS in WoW just aren't the same
What do you mean you don't like meaningless AA failing to shoot down planes that respawn anyways? Would a Gato class that moves faster than a fricking Seawolf ease your mind perhaps?
CV were better when controlling them was a mini-RTS and I'm tired of pretending they weren't
Wait how do you play CVs now?
You manually fly the plane and do the attack run yourself while your CV go in the autopilot path you told it to go.
if i wanted to play planes i would play war thunder, why cant we have nothing nice
Why don't you play boats in WT? I quit WoT when it became math shit with guns. Like X tank does Y damage and tank Z has Q HP. When I finally got the FV2105 183mm (the proper non made up tank) and it was barely doing any damage and the game still had shitty players ramboing their medium tanks solo instead of wolf packing up or moron heavy tanks camping in spots meant for SPGs/TD's and needing Gold ammo to do really well. Went to WT and while it has shitty bias, it is at least more fun with meme tanks.
Artys are fun as frick but unless you plan to do nothing but arty you will learn to hate World of Tanks
WoW peaks at tier 2 jap destroyers.
Everything else is worse and becomes final destination hitpoint countdown timers.
I disagree. I love playing subs. I can pretend to be Marko Ramius and sometimes i mutter to myself in a sloshy scottish accent while giving orders to my nonexistent crew
Lots of VLS cells.
Arsenal ships like this are a stupid concept.
One of the big advantages of VLS is that it allows you to distribute your firepower over multiple ships to allow for increased survivability and versatility.
pre fire-control revolution: more smaller guns to overwhelm the enemy at close range
post fire-control revolution: fewer large guns to make the most out of their range
Large guns give you a longer range so that you can hit the enemy with impunity.
Large guns also allow you to penetrate thicker armor.
They come with significant drawbacks though, mainly in terms of the cost of manufacturing and the displacement of the ship necessary to carry them.
part of the reason that missiles took over is that they allow you to put what is effectively a very big gun onto a much smaller ship.
Flight deck with aircraft
Depends on the timeframe.
Pre-dreadnought, more smaller guns was better.
For the Dreadnoughts with rangefinding equipment and a centralized fire control system, more big guns is better.
The RN considered six guns to be the bare minimum, becasue you needed that many shells splashes to refine your solution.
8 was better, 10 was ideal, but more than 6 turrets often resulted in confusion.
That may have been due to the RN not really liking HMS Erin and Agincourt.
The US and Japan managed to make their ships with six turrets work well enough.
USN used turret farms for shore bombardment only.
One huge cannon.
>no one big cannon
The armament of the Arentech Jen'Dar Battle Frigate is 10 Turbolaser Batteries and 16 Laser Cannons.
I used to love wows, but the power creep and at refusing to accept that carriers fundamentally break the game's design ruined it for me. The carrier rework just made it worse and then they actually added subs.
At least the seasonal events were good
With drones as prevalent as they are. If we had modern versions of these except every gun was radar controlled for anti-drone that would make these pretty useful in a battle group