Were they fast battleships or were they battlecruisers?

>>64025490 (OP)
Yeah.

If you get jobbed by a lone WW1 battlecruiser you lose the right to call yourself a battleship

>>64025490 (OP)
Neither, armoured cruiser.

>>64025490 (OP)
Interwar battleships that never got their battleship guns, so neutered battleships.

>>64025734
then why is Gneisenau with the 380mm guns still listed as a battlecruiser in war thunder? Checkmate, atheists

>>64025490 (OP)
The correct term is 'target barges' OP.

>>64025490 (OP)
>11" guns
>12.6" belt
it would not be wrong to call them battlecruisers

calling them battleships is probably a sop to the French, because that would place the Dunkerques firmly in the battlecruiser category

Very heavy cruiser

>>64025490 (OP)
Target.

>>64025490 (OP)
the true pocket battleships
unlike the Deutschlands

>>64025559
The Washington Treaty resulted in weird unoptimized ships due to the imposesd weight limitations. Even then many of the Treaty ships were over the limits. You can't really blame the Germans. Blame the British. They were running out of money but didn't want other powers to catch up to the Royal Navy.

German battlecruisers were comparable to battleships in terms of armor thickness and gun caliber at the time of WWI, and were already close to being fast battleships.

>>64026600
>same displacement as the Colorado-class
>also longer
>pocket

A battleship gives up speed to gain protection
A battlecruiser gives up protection to gain speed
Neither of these two German ships gave up protection to gain speed, therefore they are battleships

Germany said they're BBs
So did the RN and USN
Therefore, BBs

BBs with underpowered guns.

battleships
technically fast battleships due to their speed

>>64026295
they sank a carrier and its dd escorts

The planned O and P classes were clearly positioned as intermediate classes.

>>64027435
a battlecruiser gives up *something*, not necessarily protection

>>64027438
>So did the RN
the RN classed them as battlecruisers, initially

>>64027447
third time's the charm?

>>64025490 (OP)
People need to stop pretending like these terms have any distinction. The British were the only ones to conceive of the true battleship, and that proved an evolutionary dead-end. The Kaiser's battlecruisers were already proto-fast battleships, and that proved to be the way things were going.

>>64027497
>initially
AND THEN?

>>64027505
>People need to stop pretending like these terms have any distinction
Brainlet

>>64027505
it's mostly just semantics, yes. though it does give someone an idea on capabilities, and the forced restrictions tended to make them more or less formula for a long time.

>>64025490 (OP)
This belongs in >>>/lit/ newfag, be better

>>64027510
I suspect they reclassified them as "battleships" to accommodate the Dunkerque and Richelieu classes

>>64025490 (OP)
PanzerSchiffe

>>64025559
LMAOWNED like "Kaylee"(what a terrible name) "Goncalves"(again, awful name, this time in Brazillion. why did their parents murder them semantically???). also, 4 gang bangers got got and society freaks out

>>64027515
>mostly just semantics
semantics is important dawg. really an underrated and under-respected aspect of understanting

>>64027505
>British were the only ones to conceive of the true battleship
do I need to mention the GNAA