Personally:Unchecked the Alaska runs the match if the captain is competent. And on average anyone playing the Scharnhorst just by their mere presence changes the outcome of the match to their favor.
Alaska gives me way more trouble to put down than the Scharnhorst. I think it's because the guns are big enough to put the hurt down on a battleship. Scharnhorst just kinda tickles the 7.0 battleships.
Scharnhorst I feel like a god in. I dont fear much cause I casually sail into the enemy spawn and torpedo everyone which us very stupid and the absurdly low reload allows me to fire so often I can keep the enemy from firing for long periods of time
I was kinda expecting the Scharnhorst to be the best. Though very nice guide/ comparison. Its easier to have all stats before your eyes like this than looking at each trees one by one.
I love how Kronshtadt violates gaijins rules of never having any of its guns existing but then proceeds to get arguably the best naval guns in the game right now
At this point there's no reason whatsoever for Kongo and Haruna to remain at 7.0, it's a legacy of when their SAP would absolutely slaughter anything thanks to the ridiculous HE aura but after that was fixed there's basically no advantage they carry over a ship like Fuso other than speed and slightly better AA. Their damage output is worse than almost everything else at the same BR and then you've got a ship like Nevada sitting .3 lower because its guns fire more slowly but in return it gets an astronomical increase in protection.
They'd have to decompress the top tier, cause Kongo as-is would absolutely slaughter enemies if she would be in 6.7. And they can't decompress it, because it would mean ships built in the WW1 or interwar get to face cold war-era jet bombers, which would be laughably broken.
@@SkywalkerWroc Texas, Nevada, Marlborough, and the coming Iron Duke and Yamashiro already sit at 6.7 with the only cost being older ammunition that's already overkill against cruisers, there's nothing game changing about a potential Kongo downtier compared to the battleships already there when she has less main battery turrets and an absolutely dreadful secondary gun configuration.
@@SkywalkerWroc 1. Kongo/Haruna going 6.7 will nowhere near affect the balance as much as you think. This is unrelated to decompression, as the Kongos are not suffering from compression. It's just that Kongo's(and by extension Renown's) performance is just way too low for a 7.0, *even* when you consider the current compression. Kongo fits 6.7 performance nicely imo. 6.7s getting downtiers is rare anyways. 2. No. They can always decompress naval BRs. They just need to limit the max BR of aircraft that you can bring into naval. Similar limitations do exist or have existed in various modes within WT, so it is totally possible.
I agree, playing the haru haru haruna is just asking for me to be a fire magnet as its superstructure and armor does not hold well, its guns hits hard for sure but only 8 shell per salvo with a very thin armor belt and a non existent deck armor located in the middle of the ship which is where its smokestack is near
As far as the Kongos go, the IJN called them fast battleships after their refits in the 30s, but still wrote their battle plans regarding them as battlecruisers. When they were refitted, the belt armor was extended, but not increased, which would lead to the loss of Hiei.
The stat comparison really highlights the absurd fantasy rail gun like performance of the Kronshtadts shells. With more explosives in the HE shell than all the others and the second highest in the AP shell. Despite being one of the smallest guns. And yet still maintaining the high penetration. Its almost like it was picked to be as meta as possible. The best one really should be Hood. Its got the best combination of speed armour and firepower... on paper. Its just gimped by the massive shell dispersion. Something the smaller calibre guns dont seem to suffer from, this is probably why you found Hood and Kongo inconsistent. But Scharnhorst takes it because its guns are good enough, fire quickly and its damn near un-killable.
I don't deny that Russian bias exists for Kron, but the way you and most people describe it is wrong. The HE shell is taken directly from the Kommuna. You'll find that it has insane stats there as well. The fact is, it's a light coastal bombardment shell that was never supposed to be fired at ships. It has a very thin casing, which is why it has so much explosive. Think of it as a naval version of Minengeschoss. Many other guns of the period actually had similar shells. The bias here is making such shells work the same as normal HE shells against ships, and giving such shells only to the Russians. It's more a case of an inconsistency bias, rather than a direct performance bias. The AP shell has such high pen only because of the insane velocity. All penetration is calculated based on the same formula in-game. The formula does take into account of how much explosive is in the shell, as well as stuff like weight, caliber, and velocity. The problem is that the formula itself seems to over-factor velocity and under-factor explosive filler ratios. This ends up favoring Russian guns and shells that (historically) tend to have high velocity and high filler ratios, which is probably not a coincidence. IRL this did and would have caused numerous issues regarding barrel life and reliability, but that is sadly (perhaps conveniently) not represented in-game. That is where the bias lies, and it's not just a flat buff to the Kron's guns. This doesn't just affect Kron's guns. Almost all Russian guns are affected by this bias. Italian guns, which tend to have high velocity (at the cost of other factors IRL ofc), are also somewhat affected by this. But their guns also tend to have low filler ratios in return. So tl;dr, the game's systems and inconsistency is what makes the Kron(and other Russian ships)'s guns so biased. It's not a flat out "+100 penetration" kind of arbitrary bias as some people think.
@@zohaibtariq7351 Well I'm taking a super long brake from WT right now, that might end up with me leaving completely. So RIP if that's true. But I did leave a comment on that video, so feel free to check it out.
Jetzt, nachdem ich das Video komplett gesehen habe, muss ich sagen, dass vieles von dem was ich erwartet habe auch eingetroffen ist. Ich stimme dir voll und ganz zu, dass es darauf ankommt, wogegen man gerade kämpft. Aber: aus persönlicher Erfahrung mit ihr kann ich sagen, dass die Scharnhorst trotz der statistisch schlechtesten AP-Granaten ein gefährlicher Gegner für Schlachtschiffe und Schlachtkreuzer ist, was nicht gerade wenig mit der hohen Feuerrate der 28cm zusammenhängt. Vielen vielen Dank für diesen wirklich guten, objektiven und detaillierten Vergleich der Kreuzer. Wirklich, bitte mehr Videos dieser Art. Vorschläge/Wünsche meinerseits für zukünftige Vergleiche: 7.0 Schlachtschiffe 6.3 Schlachtschiffe und 6.3 Schlachtkreuzer (Prognose: die deutschen Schiffe werden ziemlich gut abschneiden) 5.0 Zerstörer, sowohl Tech Tree als auch Premium Reserve Zerstörer und Patrouillenboote 2.7 Küstenflotte (S-701 ist das beste, meiner Meinung nach) 6.0 leichte Kreuzer, vor allem: US Kreuzer vs. Pr.56 Kreuzer Besten Schiffe einer Nation auf einem bestimmten BR (3.3 bis 4.3), Hochsee- und Küstenflotte Beste Küstenflottenbewaffnung, sowohl zwischen den einzelnen Nationen als auch innerhalb einer Nation, aufgeteilt in klein-, mittel- und großkalibrig, mit den Grenzwerten von der Battlepass Herausforderung vom vorletzten BP, bei der es um diese ging Usw, usw. Ich bin ein riesiger Fan von Seeschlachten in War Thunder und bin (mehr als nur ein bisschen) enttäuscht, wie sehr dieser Spielmodus von anderen verachtet und verlacht wird. Deine objektiven und auch offensichtlich leidenschaftlichen Videos zu verschieden diesen Modus betreffenden Themen sind etwas, was mich sehr erfreut. Aber auch dein anderer Content gefällt mir sehr, vor allem wegen deiner Verwendung von Statistiken und deiner eigenen Meinung und Erfahrung. Bitte, mach noch lange so weiter und alles gute! Grüße aus Schleswig Holstein!
Da kann ich nur zustimmen! Finde es auch schade wie viele auf den Modus herabsehen, wobei dieser für mich persönlich der Grund ist weswegen ich dieses Spiel hauptsächlich spiele!
@@scharnhorstenjoyer1936bei mir sind Seeschlachten auch der Grund, warum ich mit War Thunder angefangen habe. Dein RUclips Name ist etwas, was ich auch so sehe. Scharnhorst ist einfach super.
Fuck the aircraft part who gives a fuck remove them from naval if necessary!!! I own a full line up of 7.0s I'm not in trouble but 6.0 players should not face 6.7 or 7.0 it's ridiculous that they have to face 7.0 it's not possible to compare them. Plus poor 5.7s have to face 6.7
Really nice to get this breakdown, especially if you want to pick what to grind for. Thanks for all your effort! Love the channel and stuff you did with people like Drachinifel and Squire as well!
The reason why Kongo class are lightly armored. Is that Japan still wants Kongo class to be fast so that she is able to catch up with Cruisers and Destroyers in their fleet. Plus, Kongo armor sceme is Classic Dreadnought style armor scheme where they try ti protect everything as much as possible unlike the All for nothing armor scheme where you focus armor on the important compartment. Therefore, Kongo is quite lightly armored.
Scharn and krons are by far and away the best battlecruisers in the game right now, (and just ships in general) between the two I probably like the scharn more as both are really tanky (scharn more-so especially broadside as well as against aircraft) but the torpedoes + aa just make it more enjoyable to play but both easily seal club every other ship in the game. The AP on the 11 inch guns has its limits but the fire rate and accuracy make up for it imo, both could be considered but anytime I’m in a krons the only ship I don’t want to fight is a scharnhorst while in a scharnhorst I feel like I could fight any ship.
I do agree with the Scharnhorst, but in my personal opinion if you know how to crack the Kronshtadt its really an easy target, i dont really have problems fighting it playing with my japanese for example. Even killed a few kronshtadts with my Paris and Lorraine. Im not saying its bad and it sure hurts A LOT, but it really is easy to ammo rack (tho you need to ammo rack it more than once usually)
yeah completely agree, but if you know what you are doing in the krons you can bow in and just be practically invincible, I agree that the krons is fragile captained by players who don't know how to use its tankiness properly and therefore makes it way more susceptiable to death@@scharnhorstenjoyer1936
krons are hard to sink but super easy to ammorack. They'll survive you blowing up all the main battery ammo, but itll turn into a giant 152mm gun cruiser for the rest of the game
Napal, they recently fixed/nerfed Kronshdatd, now it dies very very easily to almost any gun at 6.7 and up. i've tried playing it in the past few days and i quit because you get one tapped just a few minutes into the match. it doesn't have the magic armor anymore.
Hello Napalm. I am back to playing War Thunder again after a very long break. But it’s the mobile version. All three ships are available in the mobile version with the Kron and the Alaska being very good.
Yes Sir - are you appreciated? yes. Is the effort you put in that increases the enjoyment and satisfaction of us Naval Players? Yes. Does my game play improve directly because of your channel? Yes. And i would suggest for every view you get upon which there is a comment - a ton of others are similarly enjoy your work - but just don't say anything.
If it's about actually winning a game, Kronshtadt and it's not even close bc as usual the Soviets get absolutely everything in their lineups The only possible exception is the circle of death where a win by cheese is easy
Imo i would say the Scharnhorst. I own all the blue water ships and from my experience its the most reliable. Kronshdats, Alaskas and Kongos are very easy to crack if you know how to, and the HMS Hood isnt really as reliable (especially the shells). It may have the lowest penetration, but it has enough to handle most situations and thanks to its high dpm it would just totally make its opponent suffer.
Alaska I see deleting enemy ships constantly along with the Scharnhorst as well and a little bit of the Kronshtadt as I have seen plenty of people complain about fighting it when in the EC mode.
The biggest buff in playing as the Scharnhorst is that people target others before you. Rather go for easier kills than spend a long time slowly taking it out. If this was 1v1 the Scharnhorst would not be so dominant.
@@Napalmratte yes but it usually takes most of a match and just isn't worth it. Most of the time the other team ignores me when I use Scharn just because of that. It really needs a nerf. I kind of feel guilty when using it, but hey, gotta get that survivor bonus when I activate a 300% sl booster 😁
@@zohaibtariq7351 yes but for the sake of fair gameplay it needs some kind of balancing. I should have at least one bad match in it from time to time but it's essentially an "I win" vehicle in it's current state.
From personal experience, I feel like it’s the scharnost, because whenever I fight it, it just doesn’t die. Hood dies too easily, alaska is good at everything, and idk about the rest
Without double standard We should be agree with shithorst being the best, followed by Kronshtadt & Alaska because Hood really like to explode both irl/in game
I was close to getting Scharnhorst before gaijin decided it was too easy and added an entire new tier. They really are annoying with that mentality honestly
USS Alaska was not classified battlecruiser because it was a large heavy cruiser or cruiser killer, the Scharnorst was classified as battleship but it actually was a large cruiser killer like the Alaska
@@JulietaBersabal Scharnorst was classified as battleship which is exactly what I said, "pocket battleship" was just a nickname given by the British to such German warships like the Deutschland class also, not an official classification
its only the best if no other high caliber ships are shooting you. your magazines explode when someone looks at it funny with a 11"+ shell. It wont sink you, but youll run out of working main guns really fast. (i have one, and I also shoot at them in the scharnhorst)
As owner of all of us naval bluewater and soon to be germany, scharn is 100 percent the best just because of its turtleback armor and quick reload 283mm cannons
Ya, the Kongo class is rough. But those 18" guns are BRUTAL when you connect, especially if you know where to aim. I've been cussed out by many Arizona players after they go down in 1-3 salvoes.
Kronshtadt I am surprised is even in the game of WT because it was never built they only got started not even one of the 2 they started got completed. I wonder if Gaijin is going to keep that ship in the game like the Maus and Panther 2 and Coelian. These tanks got started and mock-ups were made and what have you and now they are unobtainable besides the Maus but no one can get their hands on them unless you researched them a while back. The Kronshtadt or Project 69 heavy cruiser was only a hull that was 10% completethat'ss basically nothing but Gaijin threw in in the game. So just from research the Panther 2 was more complete and the Maus was more complete and even the Coelian had a wooden mock-up that was done just missing a few things
I disagree that the Renown and Hood are the same with the hood being better. Far from it - the Renown has a way more advanced secondary loadout of a higher caliber and more AA;s overall as well with pretty much the same armour except improvements to protect the secondaries. Renown is definitely up there as the best BC, but Krodst wins out because of it's paper stats. Russian bias wins
Sadly with HE nerf, not much you can do. Back in the days you could melt any BB with an HE constant shower not even counting the random single HE hit detonation. HE needed to be nerfed but Gaijin went too far.
Scharnhorst got hit real hard by the new flooding mechanics. Its still super survivable and the best cruiser/weaker battleship killer but it really struggles against the top end battleships and even some stronger battle cruisers like itself and the hood. Hood is probably the best overall aside from the gun dispersion being hilariously bad at times. Good armor and the 15" guns are good at everything but do loose out on dpm. Kongo is fun but just kinda meh... worst protection, not particularly fast compared to the competition and laughable secondaries. Compared to the rest of japan's top end lineup its just not worth it
Interesting you didn’t include the Italian top tier ship, which has the most damaging shells in the entire game. The Hood has the most explosive shells in the game. (From what I’ve seen)
@@Napalmratte I’m not sure I would have to check but I’m about to go to sleep. Since you’re asking though it’s probably no and you already know better than me because you did the research. On side note though, what was your favorite naval/coastal branch to level up? Coastal is very boring to me
The hms hood is hard to ammo rack, all of its shit is underwater it’s in second place for me and Sharn is in first kein and Alaska are horrible at tanking shots sharnhorst ammo racks then easily
@@NapalmratteYou did indeed mention that it is a never ending debate, but I feel obligated to state my opinion on the matter whenever it's brought up. Side note the B in CB only denotes "Large" not "battle" as mentioned in the video.
My favorite thing about the Kronshtadt is Gaijin using the Soviet ship designers *claimed* performance... you know, the thing they deliberately inflated so they wouldn't get shot/hung for treasonous anti-communistic sentiment... it's just the usual Russia bias lol. (seriously... just like their tanks, Russia IRL exaggerates them so much it's insane, and then Gaijin takes those exaggeration statistics as fact. vs NATO, which conspicuously downplays their tanks' armor/gun capabilities.. so they're unrealistically bad in War Thunder.
@@RickStralen How so? I regard myself as a rather experienced naval player. Let’s see what you have to say. If you want to say that the 15” firepower makes Renown strong, then what about Hood, which has two more of the same guns plus infinitely better survivability, at the same BR?
Soviet designers had a tendency to overstate what could be built, in order to both: "further the revolution" and get the thing built. Meanwhile Gaijin uncritically takes these numbers and puts them in the game... so we have guns that hilariously over-perform compared to what was possible at the time.
![SMS Sachsen - The Big Why? [War Thunder]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_KGvgFhHmSs/mqdefault.jpg)
![SMS Sachsen - The Big Why? [War Thunder]](/img/tr.png)
![Naval Buying & Talisman Guide 2023 [War Thunder]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/jmhaA7mzScU/mqdefault.jpg)
![SMS Derfflinger, 1916 [Ship Review] - War Thunder](/img/1.gif)
The answer is obviously the RN Trento, as it is a cruiser i take into a battle, thus being my favourite Battle Cruiser
😄
That, is the best answer.
Thanks for making Me Chuckle dude.
For its BR Trento is absolutely brilliant.
Issue is - the moment you start taking it in a line-up with a higher BR ships it struggles.
Personally:Unchecked the Alaska runs the match if the captain is competent. And on average anyone playing the Scharnhorst just by their mere presence changes the outcome of the match to their favor.
Alaska is so much easier to ammo rack
Scarnhorst is so hard to kill
What do you think about the flooding mechanics?
Alaska gives me way more trouble to put down than the Scharnhorst. I think it's because the guns are big enough to put the hurt down on a battleship. Scharnhorst just kinda tickles the 7.0 battleships.
Scharnhorst I feel like a god in. I dont fear much cause I casually sail into the enemy spawn and torpedo everyone which us very stupid and the absurdly low reload allows me to fire so often I can keep the enemy from firing for long periods of time
I was kinda expecting the Scharnhorst to be the best.
Though very nice guide/ comparison. Its easier to have all stats before your eyes like this than looking at each trees one by one.
Glad you enjoyed!
I love how Kronshtadt violates gaijins rules of never having any of its guns existing but then proceeds to get arguably the best naval guns in the game right now
i read somewhere that the gun did exist as surface batteries but i dont have any sources for that
Also: Yes please!
More comparisons and numbers crunching!!
ok which ones would you like to see?
@@Napalmrattewich ship (in general) have the best survivability : in a few episode like 1 against gun / 2nd with bombs / 3rd with torpedo
@@Napalmratte Might Sound a Bit annoying, but I Wrote some ideas in another comment….
At this point there's no reason whatsoever for Kongo and Haruna to remain at 7.0, it's a legacy of when their SAP would absolutely slaughter anything thanks to the ridiculous HE aura but after that was fixed there's basically no advantage they carry over a ship like Fuso other than speed and slightly better AA. Their damage output is worse than almost everything else at the same BR and then you've got a ship like Nevada sitting .3 lower because its guns fire more slowly but in return it gets an astronomical increase in protection.
Not to mention Renown…
They'd have to decompress the top tier, cause Kongo as-is would absolutely slaughter enemies if she would be in 6.7.
And they can't decompress it, because it would mean ships built in the WW1 or interwar get to face cold war-era jet bombers, which would be laughably broken.
@@SkywalkerWroc Texas, Nevada, Marlborough, and the coming Iron Duke and Yamashiro already sit at 6.7 with the only cost being older ammunition that's already overkill against cruisers, there's nothing game changing about a potential Kongo downtier compared to the battleships already there when she has less main battery turrets and an absolutely dreadful secondary gun configuration.
@@SkywalkerWroc 1. Kongo/Haruna going 6.7 will nowhere near affect the balance as much as you think. This is unrelated to decompression, as the Kongos are not suffering from compression. It's just that Kongo's(and by extension Renown's) performance is just way too low for a 7.0, *even* when you consider the current compression. Kongo fits 6.7 performance nicely imo. 6.7s getting downtiers is rare anyways.
2. No. They can always decompress naval BRs. They just need to limit the max BR of aircraft that you can bring into naval. Similar limitations do exist or have existed in various modes within WT, so it is totally possible.
I agree, playing the haru haru haruna is just asking for me to be a fire magnet as its superstructure and armor does not hold well, its guns hits hard for sure but only 8 shell per salvo with a very thin armor belt and a non existent deck armor located in the middle of the ship which is where its smokestack is near
As far as the Kongos go, the IJN called them fast battleships after their refits in the 30s, but still wrote their battle plans regarding them as battlecruisers. When they were refitted, the belt armor was extended, but not increased, which would lead to the loss of Hiei.
The stat comparison really highlights the absurd fantasy rail gun like performance of the Kronshtadts shells. With more explosives in the HE shell than all the others and the second highest in the AP shell. Despite being one of the smallest guns. And yet still maintaining the high penetration. Its almost like it was picked to be as meta as possible.
The best one really should be Hood. Its got the best combination of speed armour and firepower... on paper. Its just gimped by the massive shell dispersion. Something the smaller calibre guns dont seem to suffer from, this is probably why you found Hood and Kongo inconsistent. But Scharnhorst takes it because its guns are good enough, fire quickly and its damn near un-killable.
That's Russian bias for you
F@*k war thunder
I don't deny that Russian bias exists for Kron, but the way you and most people describe it is wrong.
The HE shell is taken directly from the Kommuna. You'll find that it has insane stats there as well. The fact is, it's a light coastal bombardment shell that was never supposed to be fired at ships. It has a very thin casing, which is why it has so much explosive. Think of it as a naval version of Minengeschoss. Many other guns of the period actually had similar shells. The bias here is making such shells work the same as normal HE shells against ships, and giving such shells only to the Russians. It's more a case of an inconsistency bias, rather than a direct performance bias.
The AP shell has such high pen only because of the insane velocity. All penetration is calculated based on the same formula in-game. The formula does take into account of how much explosive is in the shell, as well as stuff like weight, caliber, and velocity. The problem is that the formula itself seems to over-factor velocity and under-factor explosive filler ratios. This ends up favoring Russian guns and shells that (historically) tend to have high velocity and high filler ratios, which is probably not a coincidence. IRL this did and would have caused numerous issues regarding barrel life and reliability, but that is sadly (perhaps conveniently) not represented in-game. That is where the bias lies, and it's not just a flat buff to the Kron's guns. This doesn't just affect Kron's guns. Almost all Russian guns are affected by this bias. Italian guns, which tend to have high velocity (at the cost of other factors IRL ofc), are also somewhat affected by this. But their guns also tend to have low filler ratios in return.
So tl;dr, the game's systems and inconsistency is what makes the Kron(and other Russian ships)'s guns so biased. It's not a flat out "+100 penetration" kind of arbitrary bias as some people think.
@@kkang2828 did you watch the Canadian lad's video?
Playable CVs are coming to war thunder naval
RIP
@@zohaibtariq7351 Well I'm taking a super long brake from WT right now, that might end up with me leaving completely. So RIP if that's true.
But I did leave a comment on that video, so feel free to check it out.
@@kkang2828 yup I am on a break too
I hope we will meet again even if we stop playing war thunder for good
Jetzt, nachdem ich das Video komplett gesehen habe, muss ich sagen, dass vieles von dem was ich erwartet habe auch eingetroffen ist. Ich stimme dir voll und ganz zu, dass es darauf ankommt, wogegen man gerade kämpft.
Aber: aus persönlicher Erfahrung mit ihr kann ich sagen, dass die Scharnhorst trotz der statistisch schlechtesten AP-Granaten ein gefährlicher Gegner für Schlachtschiffe und Schlachtkreuzer ist, was nicht gerade wenig mit der hohen Feuerrate der 28cm zusammenhängt.
Vielen vielen Dank für diesen wirklich guten, objektiven und detaillierten Vergleich der Kreuzer. Wirklich, bitte mehr Videos dieser Art.
Vorschläge/Wünsche meinerseits für zukünftige Vergleiche:
7.0 Schlachtschiffe
6.3 Schlachtschiffe und 6.3 Schlachtkreuzer (Prognose: die deutschen Schiffe werden ziemlich gut abschneiden)
5.0 Zerstörer, sowohl Tech Tree als auch Premium
Reserve Zerstörer und Patrouillenboote
2.7 Küstenflotte (S-701 ist das beste, meiner Meinung nach)
6.0 leichte Kreuzer, vor allem: US Kreuzer vs. Pr.56 Kreuzer
Besten Schiffe einer Nation auf einem bestimmten BR (3.3 bis 4.3), Hochsee- und Küstenflotte
Beste Küstenflottenbewaffnung, sowohl zwischen den einzelnen Nationen als auch innerhalb einer Nation, aufgeteilt in klein-, mittel- und großkalibrig, mit den Grenzwerten von der Battlepass Herausforderung vom vorletzten BP, bei der es um diese ging
Usw, usw.
Ich bin ein riesiger Fan von Seeschlachten in War Thunder und bin (mehr als nur ein bisschen) enttäuscht, wie sehr dieser Spielmodus von anderen verachtet und verlacht wird. Deine objektiven und auch offensichtlich leidenschaftlichen Videos zu verschieden diesen Modus betreffenden Themen sind etwas, was mich sehr erfreut. Aber auch dein anderer Content gefällt mir sehr, vor allem wegen deiner Verwendung von Statistiken und deiner eigenen Meinung und Erfahrung.
Bitte, mach noch lange so weiter und alles gute!
Grüße aus Schleswig Holstein!
Kann nur zustimmen.👍👍👍
Da kann ich nur zustimmen!
Finde es auch schade wie viele auf den Modus herabsehen, wobei dieser für mich persönlich der Grund ist weswegen ich dieses Spiel hauptsächlich spiele!
@@scharnhorstenjoyer1936bei mir sind Seeschlachten auch der Grund, warum ich mit War Thunder angefangen habe.
Dein RUclips Name ist etwas, was ich auch so sehe. Scharnhorst ist einfach super.
Ich finde das System auch viel besser als das in anderen großen Panzer und Schiff spielen. WoT, WoWs
7.0 ships vs 6.0s is literal bullying, except for the Alaska ive seen 5.7s ammo rack them. I think there should be at least 7.7 right now for naval
The problem becomes aircraft. If they move them to 7.7 there will be some very dangerous aircraft to have to fight off
Aircraft should get different BR for naval anyway lol@@thequintanahomestead3820
@@thequintanahomestead3820 They can always just lock the max BR of aircraft that you can bring.
Fuck the aircraft part who gives a fuck remove them from naval if necessary!!! I own a full line up of 7.0s I'm not in trouble but 6.0 players should not face 6.7 or 7.0 it's ridiculous that they have to face 7.0 it's not possible to compare them. Plus poor 5.7s have to face 6.7
Really nice to get this breakdown, especially if you want to pick what to grind for. Thanks for all your effort! Love the channel and stuff you did with people like Drachinifel and Squire as well!
Appreciate it!
The reason why Kongo class are lightly armored. Is that Japan still wants Kongo class to be fast so that she is able to catch up with Cruisers and Destroyers in their fleet. Plus, Kongo armor sceme is Classic Dreadnought style armor scheme where they try ti protect everything as much as possible unlike the All for nothing armor scheme where you focus armor on the important compartment. Therefore, Kongo is quite lightly armored.
Great effort Napalm as always.
Thanks a lot 😊
Scharn and krons are by far and away the best battlecruisers in the game right now, (and just ships in general) between the two I probably like the scharn more as both are really tanky (scharn more-so especially broadside as well as against aircraft) but the torpedoes + aa just make it more enjoyable to play but both easily seal club every other ship in the game. The AP on the 11 inch guns has its limits but the fire rate and accuracy make up for it imo, both could be considered but anytime I’m in a krons the only ship I don’t want to fight is a scharnhorst while in a scharnhorst I feel like I could fight any ship.
I do agree with the Scharnhorst, but in my personal opinion if you know how to crack the Kronshtadt its really an easy target, i dont really have problems fighting it playing with my japanese for example. Even killed a few kronshtadts with my Paris and Lorraine. Im not saying its bad and it sure hurts A LOT, but it really is easy to ammo rack (tho you need to ammo rack it more than once usually)
yeah completely agree, but if you know what you are doing in the krons you can bow in and just be practically invincible, I agree that the krons is fragile captained by players who don't know how to use its tankiness properly and therefore makes it way more susceptiable to death@@scharnhorstenjoyer1936
krons are hard to sink but super easy to ammorack. They'll survive you blowing up all the main battery ammo, but itll turn into a giant 152mm gun cruiser for the rest of the game
love this kind of video, looking at all the stats and charts is very intresting, so waiting for more!
Napal, they recently fixed/nerfed Kronshdatd, now it dies very very easily to almost any gun at 6.7 and up. i've tried playing it in the past few days and i quit because you get one tapped just a few minutes into the match. it doesn't have the magic armor anymore.
One thing I like about the Kongo is that their AP shells are reliable below the waterline
Hello Napalm. I am back to playing War Thunder again after a very long break. But it’s the mobile version. All three ships are available in the mobile version with the Kron and the Alaska being very good.
Finally, was waiting for this video :)
Hope you enjoyed it!
Onde I duelled you in a Sharnhorst vs Sharnhorst fight.Didn't had a chance, it's also my favorita ship
Yes Sir - are you appreciated? yes. Is the effort you put in that increases the enjoyment and satisfaction of us Naval Players? Yes. Does my game play improve directly because of your channel? Yes. And i would suggest for every view you get upon which there is a comment - a ton of others are similarly enjoy your work - but just don't say anything.
Gonna relax watching this nice video in advance
Enjoy!
If it's about actually winning a game, Kronshtadt and it's not even close bc as usual the Soviets get absolutely everything in their lineups
The only possible exception is the circle of death where a win by cheese is easy
Imo i would say the Scharnhorst. I own all the blue water ships and from my experience its the most reliable. Kronshdats, Alaskas and Kongos are very easy to crack if you know how to, and the HMS Hood isnt really as reliable (especially the shells). It may have the lowest penetration, but it has enough to handle most situations and thanks to its high dpm it would just totally make its opponent suffer.
i hope you could make videos a bout reviewing all nation naval ships because that will help a lot to someone that want to start naval like me
Yeah Well too much Work for too little reward. My Guides should Help though 🤔
Alaska I see deleting enemy ships constantly along with the Scharnhorst as well and a little bit of the Kronshtadt as I have seen plenty of people complain about fighting it when in the EC mode.
I love the Alaska. Easy to kill yes, but if you know how to angle and maneuver, you can be quite deadly
You excel ranger, you! ☺
The biggest buff in playing as the Scharnhorst is that people target others before you. Rather go for easier kills than spend a long time slowly taking it out. If this was 1v1 the Scharnhorst would not be so dominant.
Scharnhorst without a doubt. Just cant kill those things with guns.
Oh you can but have t requires a bit of luck
@@Napalmratte yes but it usually takes most of a match and just isn't worth it. Most of the time the other team ignores me when I use Scharn just because of that. It really needs a nerf. I kind of feel guilty when using it, but hey, gotta get that survivor bonus when I activate a 300% sl booster 😁
@@HamburgerMolesterHistorical. I want the „„survivalbility““ of the Bismarck-Klasse.
@@HamburgerMolesterit doesn't need a nerf it's historically accurate
We need 15 and 16 inch guns
@@zohaibtariq7351 yes but for the sake of fair gameplay it needs some kind of balancing. I should have at least one bad match in it from time to time but it's essentially an "I win" vehicle in it's current state.
From personal experience, I feel like it’s the scharnost, because whenever I fight it, it just doesn’t die. Hood dies too easily, alaska is good at everything, and idk about the rest
Yeah Scharnhorst be like that. Remember this comment before Gaijijn introduces Yamato
What is the best Prem ship
Prem Boat?
great video
Thanks for the visit
I don’t now what they did to Krohn but last two weeks I’ve been one shot a half dozen times and even killed by cruisers.
Without double standard
We should be agree with shithorst being the best, followed by Kronshtadt & Alaska because Hood really like to explode both irl/in game
I was close to getting Scharnhorst before gaijin decided it was too easy and added an entire new tier. They really are annoying with that mentality honestly
Thats the normal way in War Thunder
USS Alaska was not classified battlecruiser because it was a large heavy cruiser or cruiser killer, the Scharnorst was classified as battleship but it actually was a large cruiser killer like the Alaska
I explained that all in the Video m8 😊
I think scharnorst was classified as pocket battleship not large cruiser killer like Alaska
@@JulietaBersabal Scharnorst was classified as battleship which is exactly what I said, "pocket battleship" was just a nickname given by the British to such German warships like the Deutschland class also, not an official classification
Could you do a video on IJN Yubari? I'm curious about what you'd have to say about it.
Scharnhorst. end of video
The Kron is the best, has no one on deck to deplete crew %, which means longer life. Simple as that.
its only the best if no other high caliber ships are shooting you. your magazines explode when someone looks at it funny with a 11"+ shell. It wont sink you, but youll run out of working main guns really fast. (i have one, and I also shoot at them in the scharnhorst)
Meine Meinung: Scharnhorst
Rein persönliche Meinung.
As owner of all of us naval bluewater and soon to be germany, scharn is 100 percent the best just because of its turtleback armor and quick reload 283mm cannons
Ya, the Kongo class is rough. But those 18" guns are BRUTAL when you connect, especially if you know where to aim. I've been cussed out by many Arizona players after they go down in 1-3 salvoes.
14" Not 18"
@@Napalmratte ya, my bad- sleep deprived and dozing off watching YT got me 😅
All wrong... IJN Ikoma rules the waves!
Reeeee 😢
Do we know if shell weight matters at all in the game?
AFAIK it's not used for damage calculation, only the bursting charge matters.
Well it Matters for penetration retention. Co pare Alaska and Kronshtadt AP 😊
@Napalmratte yea, so if you look at pen, calibre and filler tnt equiv. you have all the info. Weight is irrelevant on its own.
I like the Kongo but she is pretty fragile compared to most other battlecruisers
good balanced ship but she easy capsize...
With Me Being British It's HMS Hood For Me
Kronshtadt I am surprised is even in the game of WT because it was never built they only got started not even one of the 2 they started got completed. I wonder if Gaijin is going to keep that ship in the game like the Maus and Panther 2 and Coelian. These tanks got started and mock-ups were made and what have you and now they are unobtainable besides the Maus but no one can get their hands on them unless you researched them a while back.
The Kronshtadt or Project 69 heavy cruiser was only a hull that was 10% completethat'ss basically nothing but Gaijin threw in in the game. So just from research the Panther 2 was more complete and the Maus was more complete and even the Coelian had a wooden mock-up that was done just missing a few things
The fuze delay from the hood hurts her very much...
Alaska is my favorite (because it’s the only one i have)
I disagree that the Renown and Hood are the same with the hood being better. Far from it - the Renown has a way more advanced secondary loadout of a higher caliber and more AA;s overall as well with pretty much the same armour except improvements to protect the secondaries. Renown is definitely up there as the best BC, but Krodst wins out because of it's paper stats. Russian bias wins
Any tips for killing battleships with the helena??
Spam he to force continous fire and flood repair
You don’t.
Sadly with HE nerf, not much you can do. Back in the days you could melt any BB with an HE constant shower not even counting the random single HE hit detonation.
HE needed to be nerfed but Gaijin went too far.
Where do u get your info from
Ingame stats
Scharnhorst got hit real hard by the new flooding mechanics. Its still super survivable and the best cruiser/weaker battleship killer but it really struggles against the top end battleships and even some stronger battle cruisers like itself and the hood.
Hood is probably the best overall aside from the gun dispersion being hilariously bad at times. Good armor and the 15" guns are good at everything but do loose out on dpm.
Kongo is fun but just kinda meh... worst protection, not particularly fast compared to the competition and laughable secondaries. Compared to the rest of japan's top end lineup its just not worth it
Interesting you didn’t include the Italian top tier ship, which has the most damaging shells in the entire game. The Hood has the most explosive shells in the game. (From what I’ve seen)
Is it a battlecruiser?
@@Napalmratte I’m not sure I would have to check but I’m about to go to sleep. Since you’re asking though it’s probably no and you already know better than me because you did the research.
On side note though, what was your favorite naval/coastal branch to level up? Coastal is very boring to me
Its surly the hood surly ahahahah
The hms hood is hard to ammo rack, all of its shit is underwater it’s in second place for me and Sharn is in first kein and Alaska are horrible at tanking shots sharnhorst ammo racks then easily
Bayern?
I prefer the Renown
She pops too easily.
What aboy the duillio
Well it might make an appearance in the Battleship comparison
@@Napalmratte i thought it was a BC but either way
Well neither Kongou (In their refit forms) nor Scharnhorst are battlecruisers sooooooooooooooooooooooo
Well, as I said I simply go with the Gaijin definition/description. Sooooooo 🤔
@@Napalmratte or sorry i mustve mised that bit. it wasnt a dig at you at all
Friendly reminder that the Alaska is not a Battlecruiser.
I explained this greatly in the video
@@NapalmratteYou did indeed mention that it is a never ending debate, but I feel obligated to state my opinion on the matter whenever it's brought up.
Side note the B in CB only denotes "Large" not "battle" as mentioned in the video.
Hood
My favorite thing about the Kronshtadt is Gaijin using the Soviet ship designers *claimed* performance... you know, the thing they deliberately inflated so they wouldn't get shot/hung for treasonous anti-communistic sentiment... it's just the usual Russia bias lol. (seriously... just like their tanks, Russia IRL exaggerates them so much it's insane, and then Gaijin takes those exaggeration statistics as fact. vs NATO, which conspicuously downplays their tanks' armor/gun capabilities.. so they're unrealistically bad in War Thunder.
Hms renown and scharnhorst scharn has the bb armor but lacks firepower. Renown has the 15inch guns pens any ship armor wise not the best but capable
british 15" is very inaccurate and unreliable..
@@christians.597 On a gun which holds the record for the longest range hit on another Battleship in history. Thanks Gaijin 🙄.
What? Renown is the absolute worst 7.0 rn. Have you even played her?
@@kkang2828 thats a skill issue
@@RickStralen How so? I regard myself as a rather experienced naval player. Let’s see what you have to say.
If you want to say that the 15” firepower makes Renown strong, then what about Hood, which has two more of the same guns plus infinitely better survivability, at the same BR?
The only thing that i dislike that you have a hate boner for the Soviets the rest is ok
It is not a hatte boner. It is the only ship that never was finished. The guns listed Performance is absurd
Its paper ship with made up stats
Soviet designers had a tendency to overstate what could be built, in order to both: "further the revolution" and get the thing built. Meanwhile Gaijin uncritically takes these numbers and puts them in the game... so we have guns that hilariously over-perform compared to what was possible at the time.
The faker and sovieter the better. Dead giveaway
Gioco con lo Scharnhorst,in alcuni momenti sembra praticamente immortale 😊