1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (136 votes, average: 4.82 out of 5)

? Play World of Warships:
? Play World of Tanks :
? Play Total War Arena:

?Want to Support me ? :

Danke !


  1. Ships Stats and Captain at the end of the Replay…. more Gameplay will follow soon =) its too fu****** Hot in here ^^

  2. Looking pretty good, will we see Alaska soon?

  3. The WW1 Scharnhorst.
    The German designers used the blueprints of the hull of this ship as a shortcut to speed up the design process of the Scharnhorst.
    Unfortunately the instillation of engines nearly twice the output of the original made the bow of the Scharnhorst go “submarine” at high speed.

    • tamenga88 are you german?

    • Nanchisan Nanchisan

      Well technically the Shanhorst are more of a modified Ersatz Yorck class which were follow ups of this class, the Mackensens, with better guns to deal with Hood I’m currently, with some friends, on a complete german BC tree I will post it here as we are done

  4. Bayern: long edition

    • Just_Some_Random_Tryhard_Gamer

      Technically GK is H-42 with a 4×3 420mm 48cal armament (literally a rebored 406mm 52cal barrel – since it was known for having an unusually thick barrel liner)

      But H-42 was known to mount an impressive 4×2 480mm 52cal armament historically (unlike the preceding H41-H39 with 406-420mm guns).

      Sadly WG’s 46cm gun limit prevents GK from having her originally intended armament – plus the weebs would rage that they don’t have the biggest guns anymore.

      Edit nvm – I realised GK 10 meant Grosser Kreuzer with 42cm 52cal guns- but my point still stands that Grosser Kurfürst needs her 4×2 480mm guns.

    • Seems like Kongo: German edition. Their gun layout is similar.

    • tamenga88
      WG: the GK isn’t long enough, we need to make it longer

    • Bayern Plus :AA Edition

  5. The main battery fire has cruiser sound effect?

    • AKmaster That wont stay for long, they are just placeholders. It was the same with the Nelson when she was in development.

  6. No torpedoes on it, i disapprove .

  7. German Kongo

  8. I’ve said this before but i’m going to say it again, cv’s are such bullshit. They need to nerf the crap out of them or preferably just completely remove them from the game.

    • It was a Saipan…

    • In lieu of arguing with you, I will simply repeat what The Mighty Jingles had to say on the subject: “Carriers aren’t overpowered; your brain is underpowered.”

    • No they’re not overpowered at all, that’s why wargaming are currently doing a complete overhaul on how cv’s play yeah? And of course Jingles would say that wargaming pay his bills idiot.

    • El Gato  They can be op in certain situations and in capable hands. And WG is overhauling them because practically nobody plays them. You would see a lot more people play them if they are sooo op. They are either too strong against ships with bad AA or hilariously bad when the enemy team is sticking together or against practically every american cruiser and also pretty useless when uptiered. It is the definition of broken, but not overpowered.

  9. Kind of let down tbh….

  10. It seems to be a very good ship…

  11. Is it a battle cruiser plus that was a good game

    • Nanchisan Nanchisan

      Jennifer Loge It is Mackensen class of ww1 modernized by WG

    • It’s the GERMAN interpretation of a Battlecruiser which slightly differs from the British.
      While the British put priority on gunpower the Germans put priority with armor.
      For the Germans their battlecruisers were required to fight alongside battleship if needed.
      The British didn’t have that requirement on their battlecruisers but the did it anyways and the catastrophe was The battle of Jutland.

    • Aye. Out of all German _Gross-Kreuzer_ which served in The Great War, only the _SMS Lützow_ was lost in action, and then to flooding.

    • JamesPolymer
      There were a myriad of factors that contributed to the British being unable to win from the German although the British were in that very position to gain victory.
      Yes British battlecruisers have crap armor but it has less to do with their design being handicapped and more to do with the shoddy handling of cordite bags stacking them everywhere and leaving open firewall doors. Post Jutland the British admiralty took the extra effort to cover this up.
      The German battlecruisers were prior to the start of WW1 equally susceptible to detonate because of equally negligent handling of powder bags.
      It was the Battle of Dogger Bank in 1915 that alerted the German of the fact that a shell doesn’t need to penetrate the armor to detonate the ship.
      The Seydlitz was almost lost because of the flash of the exploding shell that detonated outside can find its ways through the cracks of the armor
      and propagate inside the ship setting everything inside ablaze.
      It was quick thinking of a few officers by quickly flooding the rear magazine that saved the ship.
      After the Battle of the Dogger Bank the Germans quickly made all their ship magazines Flash and Fire proof while incorporating strict procedures in powder handling.
      By the battle of Jutland all these new measurements made German battlecruisers nearly impossible to detonate.
      Unfortunately nobody cared to tell the British of this danger and they payed by losing 3 battlecruisers that day.

      Another handicap that made the British lose that battle was shoddy AP shells.
      The explosives and fuses the British used on their AP shells were too sensitive to shock.
      The result was that most if not all of the shells that got fired at the Germans blew outside the ships on contact.
      Not inside the German ship where it could do the most Damage.
      That’s why the German ships were almost bullet proof during Jutland
      So how did the British discover this weakness?
      By complete accident.
      In 1917 one German naval officer who visited either Sweden or Switzerland for official business “spilled the beans” about this in the German consulate.
      This information was relaid to the British.
      The British immediately tested their shells and to their horror it turned out to be true.
      The British went through all their inventory of AP shells, emptied them of their content and refilled the shells with less sensitive TNT significantly improving their performance.
      If Admiral Scheer of the German Navy have gotten his way and sortied out to challenge the British fleet in 1918 it would have been a Massacre.
      Because the British Grand Fleet from 1918 was a significantly more deadly beast compared to 1916.
      The Kiel mutiny of 1918 practically saved thousands of lives of German Sailors.

  12. What a terrible gun sound.

    • Elevenms Wont stay for long, just placeholders until development is over then they will get changed. It was the same with the Nelson when she was in the development stages.

  13. 8:59
    This ship has Cruiser dispersion.. Very accurate guns and small detection range

    Kongo German ver

  14. For a German BB, that ship is quite accurate. Would be better if they give it a battleship gun sound because those guns sounds like cruiser guns.

    That unexpected win in the last few seconds though. lol

  15. If this ship has the same dispersion as Bayern… Than god no….

  16. Alaska, Jean Bart, now this…… so many premium ships in a short period of time….. i dont think my wallet can take this…..

  17. 24 seconde reload and 2.0 sigma !! No is op ! For tier 6 !

  18. Kaga ́s Playground

    off to a great start! long wiener edition

  19. Bayern + Scharnhorst + Kongo???

  20. Владимир Пыжалов

    belly straight exhibit balance husband reward battery graduate unity.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *