Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Somedude_Yudachi

HMS conqueror

20 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
283 posts
3,556 battles

yes, yes it is higher than yamato, this is meters and this is a great way for wg to encourage sniper game-play :) nice job wg I strongly support your decision, almost as strongly as trump supports the Paris climate change agreement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
534 posts
1 minute ago, ellofiend said:

yes, yes it is higher than yamato, this is meters and this is a great way for wg to encourage sniper game-play :) nice job wg I strongly support your decision, almost as strongly as trump supports the Paris climate change agreement

Wouldn't players who have yamato regret of having it?it's too op if it has 29km firing range and 457mm guns,will WG nerf some parts of it?such as vulnerable to torps...

Edited by Somedude_Yudachi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Video Contributor
2,259 posts
10,776 battles

buff another countries and make everyone play another countries too :p

but......... sorry about small scale 

list : 2 weeks, count : Battles 

Spoiler

5IlkftA.png

new camper?

rename Conqueror to Action X same WOT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,105 posts

dont forget, +50% burn chance WAOW

29km HE SPAM....... SUSANO'O vs master unit Amaterasu :v

 

Just now, Somedude_Yudachi said:

Wouldn't players who have yamato regret of having it?it's too op if it has 29km firing range and 457mm guns,will WG nerf some parts of it?such as vulnerable to torps...

Yamato need 10km secondary buff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
43 posts
759 battles
4 hours ago, Somedude_Yudachi said:

A website claim to have details of HMS battleships temporarily from VII-X,Conqueror has firing range of 29200,what unit it is?if its meters,isn't it higher than Yamato?

 

4 hours ago, ellofiend said:

yes, yes it is higher than yamato, this is meters and this is a great way for wg to encourage sniper game-play :) nice job wg I strongly support your decision, almost as strongly as trump supports the Paris climate change agreement

They nerfed it to 24,5 kms. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
163 posts
7,901 battles

I wouldn't get worked up about a test ship until it's released in final form.  That ship has had so many changes as they go through testing different combinations and collect data. If you want to get involved earlier look up the SuperTest program.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LNA]
Member
1,655 posts
10,411 battles
1 minute ago, Rear_Admiral_Sir_Dr_Pain said:

Be grateful that Iowa, Missouri (and Montana) don't have their actual gun range of 39 kilometres.  It wouldn't be sea water you're floating in but oceans of tears.

Same can be said to any high tier BB in general though , range in this game is compressed so we dont have to face 40km chai sniping that can drag the match to 1 hours.

Also giving radar to any BB in general is a bad idea , IF it is a must it should be a much weaker version of CA/CL radar.

Cruisers should remain the utility carrier for the team , providing support to the fleet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,718 posts
1,988 battles
22 minutes ago, Harpoon01 said:

I still dont approve for battleship to have radar

^

The entire idea of regular BB having Radar is rather stupid.

 

Sure Missouri have it, but it is not something many people will grind for. But now its appearing on regular tech tree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MEGA]
Member
4,560 posts
17,542 battles
2 minutes ago, Alvin1020 said:

^

The entire idea of regular BB having Radar is rather stupid.

 

Sure Missouri have it, but it is not something many people will grind for. But now its appearing on regular tech tree.

missouri's perk is more of it's crazy credit earnings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
224
[151ST]
Member
1,008 posts
4,494 battles
2 hours ago, Rear_Admiral_Sir_Dr_Pain said:

Be grateful that Iowa, Missouri (and Montana) don't have their actual gun range of 39 kilometres.  It wouldn't be sea water you're floating in but oceans of tears.

Not really, battles would then last for hours and CVs would fight from outside the map

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
283 posts
3,556 battles

not sure if ou noticed or i took too long to notice but the Nelson, KGB, Lion and Conqueror are in the wikis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
440 posts
3,379 battles
12 hours ago, ellofiend said:

not sure if ou noticed or i took too long to notice but the Nelson, KGB, Lion and Conqueror are in the wikis

Wait, so it was the Brits that owned the KGB??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
434 posts
3,179 battles
21 hours ago, Rear_Admiral_Sir_Dr_Pain said:

Be grateful that Iowa, Missouri (and Montana) don't have their actual gun range of 39 kilometres.  It wouldn't be sea water you're floating in but oceans of tears.

Most naval guns of that era had similar ranges - it's not unusual.

WG has truncated the ranges across the board.

 

Tee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
6,604 posts
2,477 battles
1 hour ago, Skarhabek said:

i am gong to drop it here....

 

Wauw, WG make RN turn submarine into BB... :cap_haloween:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Conqueror_(S48)

 

btw, i cannt find BB HMS conquero. any link?

 try HMS Incomparable (508 mm guns)

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Incomparable

 

 

Edited by Harpoon01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
280 posts
3,514 battles

if they goin' to implement that ship in the game

Then

Can we have the accurate Iowa montana guns? also

Give us the Super German Battleship Der Fuhrer H-42 H-43 H-44

Heil!

Edited by Vorshlaghammer666

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×