Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
BIGCOREMKP0I

What is the "All Or Nothing" Concept?

19 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
1,825 posts
5,163 battles

All or nothing is a method of armoring battleships, which involves heavily armoring the areas most important to a ship while the rest of the ship receives significantly less armor.

Also read more.

The first battleship to receive this kind of armouring is the Nevada-class.

Edited by NguyenArchitakuVN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,040 posts
1,326 battles

What this translate into the game though:

- Most areas of the ship are lightly armored, light enough for other BB guns to overpen (10% dmg) instead of regular pen  (33% dmg).

- Citadel area are much harder to penetrate.

 

In other word, ships with this armor scheme tend to be quite durable, although that also depends on what are firing at them and the angle.

And also, due to the lower armoring of most parts of the ship, they are quite vulnerable to HE shells. :hiding:

Edited by Gezeiten_Heimatwelt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,826 posts
8,021 battles

All or nothing is a method of armoring battleships, which involves heavily armoring the areas most important to a ship while the rest of the ship receives significantly less armor.

Also read more.

The first battleship to receive this kind of armouring is the Nevada-class.

 

Thanks! :3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,163 posts
1,874 battles

Either you have all armor or no armor.

 

Pretty much the best tl;dr description of the all-or-nothing armour concept.

 

At this point of naval design, putting enough armour on battleships to resist other battleship guns required silly amounts of tonnage. So the Americans decided that if it wasn't critical, they weren't going to put armour on it. That means the important areas of the ship have stupendous amounts of armour while keeping overall tonnage reasonable, while the unimportant bits (bow, superstructure, etc) have next to no armour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
760 posts
6,922 battles

 

Pretty much the best tl;dr description of the all-or-nothing armour concept.

 

At this point of naval design, putting enough armour on battleships to resist other battleship guns required silly amounts of tonnage. So the Americans decided that if it wasn't critical, they weren't going to put armour on it. That means the important areas of the ship have stupendous amounts of armour while keeping overall tonnage reasonable, while the unimportant bits (bow, superstructure, etc) have next to no armour.

 

Exactly, Washington and London Naval treaties (and even before these for cost reasons) meant naval designers had to find new ways of protecting ships while saving weight (more weight = more cost), some sacrificed armor like on HMS Hood, while others sacrificed speed like on the Nelson class, until some cheeky countries decided to flout these restrictions 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
434 posts
3,179 battles

BB-40USSNewMexicoResize_zps39723d38.jpg

I'm still Curious about this "quote" that i read on the Tier VI New Mexico, anyone know what is this?

 

 

Have you considered the following:

1- the internet

2- a search engine

3- entering "All or nothing armour"

 

Here is a link, following the above easy three step process:

https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=all%20or%20nothing%20armour

 

Tee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[_AUS_]
Beta Tester
72 posts
8,722 battles

If you look at a damaged ship during the game, you will see that the life preservers do not get blown up or burnt. All of your armour is concentrated there or possibly in your life boats and rafts.

Unfortunately this leaves no armour for boring areas like turrets and engine rooms. Well at least on my ships it seems this is the case:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
195 posts
356 battles

Hey guys, also a question about the all or nothing armour scheme, what american BBs use it? Just wondering because I want to know if I will sustain heavy damage once I go up the tiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
802 posts

Hey guys, also a question about the all or nothing armour scheme, what american BBs use it? Just wondering because I want to know if I will sustain heavy damage once I go up the tiers.

 

Basically from tier 6 onwards . Although  sometime on the Colorado it feels like they went with nothing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
2,150 posts
486 battles

 

Exactly, Washington and London Naval treaties (and even before these for cost reasons) meant naval designers had to find new ways of protecting ships while saving weight (more weight = more cost), some sacrificed armor like on HMS Hood, while others sacrificed speed like on the Nelson class, until some cheeky countries decided to flout these restrictions 

 

Anyone interested in anything to do with HMS Hood could do worse than go to HMS Hood Association. It's an excellent site with all sorts of great info (one amusing one is about the experienced crew knowing to get off the toilet in heavy seas when she went into a trough because her plumbing had an unfortunate habit of creating 'geysers', LOL).

 

Not wanting to be picky, but Hood's design was mainly a result of desired performance results and not weight/treaty stuff. An 860ft ship displacing 36,000 tons wasn't exactly skimping on much, lol.

Edited by Steeltrap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
195 posts
356 battles

 

Basically from tier 6 onwards . Although  sometime on the Colorado it feels like they went with nothing

This reminds me: Why haven't they replaced the Colorado with the South Dakota class? Is it because WG think that we will just "hate" it as much as the Colorado?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
6,604 posts
2,477 battles

South Dakota is Bigger, and more armoured than Colorado and have greater firepower than her counterpart so... We will see her later on at tier 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
532 posts
1,052 battles

This reminds me: Why haven't they replaced the Colorado with the South Dakota class? Is it because WG think that we will just "hate" it as much as the Colorado?

 

For a possible second US BB line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
434 posts
3,179 battles

South Dakota is a better ship than North Carolina.

It's better armoured to resist 16" shells in the real world so it's fair to say that it will be either an alternative Tier 8 or premium Tier 8.

 

Tee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,040 posts
1,326 battles

This reminds me: Why haven't they replaced the Colorado with the South Dakota class? Is it because WG think that we will just "hate" it as much as the Colorado?

 

Simply because the South Dakota is too strong for the tier, and the Colorado fits at tier7 against Nagato.

Unfortunately, WG failed at balancing and the Colorado players suffered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×