World of Warships Blitz – British premium battlecruiser “Thunderer” review

1,712 views
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (112 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...

This is another one of the “what if the Washington Naval Treaty hadn’t happened” ships, and one that has quite the reputation on PC, so let’s take a look what she’s like in here.

00:00
03:18 History
08:10 Stats & Comparisons
13:20 Modules
15:34 Elite Bonus
16:13 Captain Skills
18:17 Camo
19:35 Hourglass / Base Capture
27:46 Cage / Epicentre
34:56 Conclusion

Opening sequence music: “Cologne 1983” by Josh Kirsch

49 Comments:

  1. From Malaysia 🇲🇾
    ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️

  2. Did somebody say DD hunter? Because it can probably be one as a battle cruiser. Or just a one salvo triple fire kinda ship. Both options arnt that bad.

    • Fun and games with Terry

      She has a hydro, which is quite useful, and the rudder shift is excellent. The biggest problem when you’re hunting DDs isn’t so much the DD itself, but the fact that you’re out in the open. Also, HE alpha strike is lower than on Conqueror, and you don’t have a RR. Still, one of the better ships to go cruiser mode in.

    • @Fun and games with Terry yeah definitely a bit easier to go cruiser mode in this ship because if the consumables and turn time. Still somewhat of a glass canon. Definitely a tier 10 vanguard.

  3. I must say in my opinion it seems like thunderer is just a bigger version of the vanguard but that is just me

  4. Um, HE citadel are possible? Amazing video though my freind

    • Yes he citadels are possible (Death from above video shows him citadelling)

    • Fun and games with Terry

      Yes. Citadels depend on the penetration – AP has the highest, followed by SAP, then HE. For the RN BBs, the gap between AP & HE is smaller (lower than usual AP pen, higher than usual HE). I’ve gotten more HE citadels with IJN 203mm than AP on enemy cruisers 🙂

    • @Fun and games with Terry wow, I never new it was even possible with anything other than ap. Its never happened to me but that could be because my I’m only at t7. Now I wanna try it lol

  5. Trying to creep up on a British battleship, as weak as they are it’s mostly never a good idea because if their HE

    • Fun and games with Terry

      it’s not just the good HE, but also the fact that they have HE loaded by default. That switch has made things hugely more … interesting … for DDs, before that, when they came with AP preloaded, you’d often see many players not realising that they should be firing HE.

    • The moment when i saw brithish bbs are weak when i brawled T7 rn BB with T6 fuso and won 😂

  6. That poor shima, 50 torps dropped in 5 salvos and only 2 hits 😂

  7. The N3 battleship design had two triple turrets super firing forward in the tradition A and B format, behind that was a smallish superstructure, and right behind that was a third triple turret in what traditionally was the Q turret. The funnel and the aft superstructure came behind that. 🙂

    • Fun and games with Terry

      They had some funky designs, starting out with basically the admiralty class, realising that their 50000t designs didn’t fit anywhere, and trying to move the guns around everywhere to see if they could reduce weight. I think one of the drafts even did away with the superfiring B/X turrets, to save weight on the raised barbette armour.

      This is how you get Nelsons.

    • Haha they did indeed. I remember seeing the designs for the G3 N3 and wondering what on earth they were thinking. I have to confess, and I’ll probably be slaughtered for saying this, but I’m a big fan of the Nelrods. I think they’re some of the most beautiful battleships ever built.

  8. As far as I can tell, Conqueror and Thunderer are L2 battleships with a Vanguard-style bow, stern, and superstructure. Thunderer does look fun, despite the squishy armor. It does seem to be good at deleting overzealous destroyers.

  9. Just a conqueror without rapid reload.. 70titanium loool
    Rapid reload and 12guns is better to start fires, but the whole line need a buff its pretty bad actually

    • @Marc, yes but for perhaps 50 000 gold you can buy it with the current crates. 😂 And after 6000 golds for historical camo… Not so expensive (joke).
      Look, today, I don’t know if you have see that. The T10 Yoshino with Clow camo is sell for 32.99 euros… In the same time, the T8 Maya with clown camo is sell for 58 or 59 euros. WarGaming joke ?

    • Fun and games with Terry

      I’ve seen the Yoshino half-price as well, might have been tempted if it wasn’t for the dreadful camo 🙂

      I’m actually curious to play the Conqueror now, and see how she compares. I don’t mind pricey premium ships, as long as the tech tree ones remain competitive.

    • @Fun and games with Terry in French, we say : Jamais deux sans trois (never 2 without 3).
      So, after Smolensk and Buffalo, I have buy it. Because the price is very good…
      Ship OK, but it’s not my Worcester or Buffalo, for the agressive play style it’s more complicated. But other game play, good thing. I like it.

      For the British BB, I’m agree. I have started the line last week since the T3, currently at T6. I want to try the T10, because a lot of experimented players says this T10 is not very good. When you have experience (I’m go at 12 000 random battles) not a too bad level (44000 average damage and a little more and more, 58% wr because not a lot of platoon and a lot of T8 at t10 game), I think it’s a good challenge to not take in every battle only a op ship. And I think, it’s not so bad. 😉

  10. Yeah, that’s a K2 that’s been through a Warspite rebuild. 8 gun 18″ with a transom stem.

    Sketches:
    https://warshipprojects.com/2017/09/27/washington-cherry-trees-ii-part-3/amp/

    The British 18″/40 was a very good gun, and it’s a bit of a shame that we didn’t get to see more of it. The Brits tried just about everything they could to blow it up in trials, but failed. Not too surprising, given it was the continuation of the 13.5″/45 and 15″/42. An impressive series of guns that probably would have out performed it’s 18″/45 successor, which was a faster shell, but about 20% lighter.

  11. WoWs British BBs are a bit rubbish. Wargaming doesn’t respect their IRL armour, best in the world. Nor their gun accuracy, also best in the world. Instead, giving them gimmicky HE and concealment. No BB in the world needs concealment (that funny R class story aside), it’s basically antithetical to being a BB. Instead, we are given snipery BBs with terrible armor and defences, and very high dispersion guns that may or may not start fires.

    Orion is tons of fun, tho.

    • Fun and games with Terry

      this has confused me as well. The N3 design draft had around 380mm of main belt plating, in an all-or-nothing scheme, yet in game, we basically get cruiser-level armour. That said, in general, accuracy in terms of armour schemes, effective armour / angles etc. is definitely taking a second seat behind game mechanics.

      Take, for example, Roma’s Pugliese torpedo defence system, which is best-in-class in the game, but IRL didn’t work very well.

    • @Fun and games with Terry My working theory is Wargaming still holds a grudge over Arkangel.

  12. Shankarshana Ratnasabapathy

    22:19 actually side scraping is driving up to a wall and basically going head on into it at a slight angle so to the enemy your armour is too deflective to pen. however, we did something similar to what happens in wows where we would park behind a rock or ridge where we can use gun depression but show only our turret (can only be done by well-armoured turrets) and either they hit the ridge/rock or the turret armour this was called going hulldown.

    • Fun and games with Terry

      Hulldown is an interesting idea for warships, since we don’t have armour angling mechanics. Would require a flat arc though, high plunging fire would just lob. It might also be possible to abuse some of the broken hitboxes on the islands, where they don’t match the textures fully.

      I’ve seen a USN CL (Brooklyn or Cleveland) on Golden Channel once, where they’d be poking only their forward turret out behind one of the corner islands, because any BB calibre would overpen their bows.

    • Shankarshana Ratnasabapathy

      @Fun and games with Terry yea hull down simply won’t work due to the odd armour mechanics of this game fun concept tho

  13. 22:20 I think they call what your doing is peek a boom where you hide behind something, pull forward, shoot and immediately reverse behind cover before they fire. Ships move way slower here but since shells take more time to reach you, it can work at long ranges.

  14. 29:25

    Enemy team is playing in “Cage: Kill the youtuber” mode

    • Fun and games with Terry

      yep 🙂 Although me usually taking point in anything, suited for doing so or not, may play a role here as well >_>

      You should have seen this when I’m out in a test ship before release, and I was still flying the CC portrait. Basically impossible to record any meaningful footage XD

      In general, if the enemy team shoots at me, and I survive, that’s a net benefit for my team, because they’re not shooting at them.

  15. NGOLO NGOLO KANTE

    This is one mighty ship, shame nobody can afford it lol, may as well call it the “press account ship”. That 22% fire chance is deadly, everything will be on fire, and unlike the conqueror you get Kremlin sized guns. Do you think you should fire AP at cruisers. With a 2000+ AP shell damage I think you should although switching you ammo type every so often could cost you.

    • Fun and games with Terry

      Despite the calibre, the AP doesn’t have the same penetration as you’d find on other battleships. The only situation I’d use it is against cruisers that make the mistake of strolling into about 8km range. At longer ranges, I often don’t bother to switch.

  16. I’ve met the thunderer several times in my vermont, no really impressed by it’s armor. I keep getting citadels lol

    • Fun and games with Terry

      It doesn’t have battleship armour. The best mindset is to think of her as a battlecruiser, or even a supercruiser, and play accordingly.

  17. I really want this ship. But I will settle with my amazing Vanguard for now. 70 70 of titanium and steel is gonna take forever

    • Fun and games with Terry

      I haven’t checked if it’s even possible on free to play to get there. Might be, but I’m not even half the way. Crates, I suppose.

      Without having played her yet, I’d say 90% of the things I’ve done in Thunderer, I could probably have done in Conqueror as well. The rudder shift is the most glaring difference, but the turning circles are identical, so once you have actually got the rudder in position, they turn just the same.

      Conqueror has higher HE alpha salvo and burst damage, and the 457 AP is really not much to write home about, so I’d say damage potential is in the same ballpark. Which leaves hydro, which is useful, and def AA, which is as well, but not deal breakers in my book.

      I’ll have to have a go at the Conqueror and see how she plays.

    • @Fun and games with Terry i have Conq. I have to play her more. Its been a while

  18. Exactly is an upgrade form the vanguard totally agree..
    The thunderer in pc is one of those ships op as hell.. like the Alaska but not sure how she ll work on blitz format… vanguard is awesome in her tier.. maybe thunderer can be awesome to… but t10 have a different way most the time.. good review Terry

    • Fun and games with Terry

      I’m not a huge fan of supercruisers, like Alaska, in top tiers. The role of “cruiser killer” can perfectly well be performed by battleships or the more dangerous heavy cruisers, and they have armour that can’t withstand the calibres of shells you encounter, while not having the manoeuvrability to counter them.

Leave a Reply

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