Battleship Rankings And Opinions

Few things start an online naval flame war faster than three simple words:
“best battleship ever?” Mention Yamato, Iowa, or Bismarck in the wrong forum and
you’ll have a 200-comment argument about armor angles, radar sets, and shell weights before your
coffee gets cold.

But beneath all the passion, there are some patterns. Historians, naval veterans, and
hardcore ship nerds tend to circle around the same short list of legendary capital ships. In this
guide to battleship rankings and opinions, we’ll walk through how people judge “the best,”
highlight the usual top contenders, and talk about why fans still disagree decades after the last
battleship fired in anger.

What Do We Mean by “Best Battleships”?

Before we start ranking, we have to admit something uncomfortable: there is no single,
universally accepted way to measure “best” when it comes to battleships. Different experts
prioritize different things:

• Firepower: caliber, number of guns, rate of fire, shell weight, range.
• Protection: armor thickness and layout, underwater protection, damage control.
• Speed & handling: how fast the ship can move and reposition in battle.
• Electronics & fire control: radar, optics, and gunnery computers.
• Operational record: what the ship actually did in combat, not just on paper.
• Strategic impact: did this ship or class change the course of a campaign or war?
• Survivability: how well it withstood hits, damage, and long wartime service.

To make things harder, battleships fought in very different contexts. Some, like
Yamato, were designed as brute-force “fleet killers” but operated in an era when air power
ruled. Others, like the American fast battleships, spent much of their time escorting carriers and
bombarding shore targets rather than dueling peers.

So instead of pretending there’s a single objective ranking, we’ll walk through a blended
view that reflects common expert lists while being honest about where opinions diverge.

Headline Rankings: The Short List

If you scan naval-history books, museum exhibits, and enthusiast forums, you’ll find a familiar
pattern. The same classes keep showing up near the top:

1. Yamato class (Japan)
2. Iowa class (United States)
3. South Dakota class (United States)
4. North Carolina class (United States)
5. Bismarck class (Germany)
6. King George V class (United Kingdom)
7. Richelieu class (France)
8. Littorio/Vittorio Veneto class (Italy)
9. HMS Hood (United Kingdom)
10. Older legends like HMS Warspite (United Kingdom)

Different lists shuffle the order, emphasize displacement or combat record, or swap in other
famous ships, but these names appear again and again. Let’s look at why.

Yamato Class: The Heavyweight Champion (On Paper)

The Japanese Yamato class is usually what people mean when they say “biggest
battleship ever built.” These giants carried 46 cm (18.1-inch) main guns, the largest
ever mounted on a battleship, and displaced around 70,000 tons at full loadan absolute monster
by World War II standards.

On paper, Yamato was terrifying:

• Nine 18.1-inch guns that could hurl massive armor-piercing shells over 25 miles.
• A thick armor belt and strong deck protection designed to resist American 16-inch shells.
• A powerful secondary and anti-aircraft battery that grew as the war went on.

The catch? Yamato was designed for a decisive big-gun showdown that never came. Instead, she was
repeatedly attacked from the air. Both Yamato and her sister ship Musashi fell to
massive carrier-based air strikes, proving that even the biggest, heaviest battleship couldn’t
shrug off concentrated air power.

That’s why rankings often call Yamato the “greatest battleship on paper,” while admitting her real
combat impact was much smaller than her size suggests.

Iowa Class: The All-Rounder and Fan Favorite

If Yamato wins the “biggest” contest, the Iowa-class battleships often win the
“best overall” argument. The U.S. Navy built four of themIowa, New Jersey, Missouri, and
Wisconsinas fast battleships that could keep up with carrier task forces while still
carrying serious firepower.

Key strengths that make Iowa-class ships rank so highly in many opinions:

• Speed: Designed for about 33 knots, they were among the fastest battleships ever.
• Firepower: Nine 16-inch/50 caliber guns with excellent range and accuracy, backed
  by twenty 5-inch dual-purpose guns.
• Advanced fire control: Radar-directed gunnery gave them a massive edge in target
  acquisition and night fighting.
• Longevity: They served in World War II, the Korean War, and even into the late
  20th century after modernization with missiles and modern electronics.

The operational record doesn’t hurt either. Missouri hosted the Japanese surrender in 1945,
New Jersey and Wisconsin fired in anger in conflicts decades later, and
Iowa herself is now a floating museum and major tourist attraction. They didn’t just look
good on blueprintsthey worked, again and again, in real operations.

South Dakota & North Carolina: Compact Powerhouses

The South Dakota and North Carolina classes are sometimes overshadowed by
the flashier Iowas, but they show up high on many expert lists for one simple reason: they packed
a lot of guns and armor into relatively compact hulls.

These ships:

• Carried nine 16-inch guns (South Dakota) or nine 16-inch/45 guns (North Carolina).
• Featured strong armor protection optimized for treaty limits.
• Fought in many major Pacific battles, escorting carriers and bombarding islands.

They weren’t quite as fast as the Iowas and lacked some of the later ships’ refinements, but
their combination of protection, firepower, and combat record keeps them firmly in the top tier.

Bismarck Class: Legendary… but Overhyped?

The German Bismarck might be the most famous battleship with the general public,
thanks to her dramatic breakout into the Atlantic, the sinking of HMS Hood, and the massive
hunt that followed. In popular culture, Bismarck is often portrayed as nearly invincible.

Naval historians tend to be more cautious. Bismarck had:

• Eight 15-inch guns in four twin turrets.
• A strong armor belt optimized for close-range, gun-to-gun fighting.
• Good speed and a solid fire-control system for her era.

But she also had weaknesses: her deck armor was less suited to long-range plunging fire, and she
fell relatively quickly once the Royal Navy brought multiple ships and aircraft to bear. Modern
analyses often place Bismarck behind Yamato, Iowa, and the best U.S. fast battleships in
overall capability, while still acknowledging her iconic status.

King George V, Richelieu, Littorio & Hood: The Supporting Cast of Greats

Rankings that go beyond the “big three” usually pull in several other notable ships and classes:

King George V Class (United Kingdom)

British treaty-era battleships like King George V and Prince of Wales featured
14-inch guns and strong armor, reflecting London Naval Treaty limitations. While their main
armament was lighter than some rivals, they benefited from solid protection, good fire control,
and the Royal Navy’s long experience with big-gun ships.

Richelieu Class (France)

The French Richelieu class is a favorite among ship geeks for its unusual layout:
two quadruple 15-inch turrets mounted forward. These fast, well-protected ships had quirks and
political complications (including service on both Allied and Vichy sides), but technically they
were very competitive designs.

Littorio / Vittorio Veneto Class (Italy)

Italy’s Littorio-class battleships combined stylish design (because of course they
did) with respectable speed and 15-inch guns. Their operational record was limited by fuel
shortages, strategic caution, and air power in the Mediterranean, but on paper they were serious
contenders.

HMS Hood and the Older Legends

HMS Hood was technically a battlecruiser, not a battleship, but she was for years
the world’s largest warship and a global symbol of British sea power. Her dramatic loss to
Bismarck in 1941 only deepened the ship’s mythic status. Meanwhile, older ships like
HMS Warspite show up in rankings thanks to long, hard-fought service careers that
spanned two world wars.

Yamato vs. Iowa vs. Bismarck: Why Fans Can’t Agree

A huge chunk of battleship debate boils down to “who would win in a fair fight?”usually imagined
as Yamato vs. an Iowa-class ship vs. Bismarck on a calm sea, ten miles apart, nobody else
interfering.

Here’s why that argument never dies:

• On paper vs. in practice: Yamato’s bigger guns and thicker armor make her look
  unbeatable in a spreadsheet, but Iowa’s radar, speed, and crew training are hard to quantify.
• Different eras and doctrines: Bismarck was designed before radar gunnery was
  fully mature and for North Atlantic surface raiding, not Pacific carrier warfare.
• Luck and conditions: Real battles include weather, crew fatigue, damage
  control, and pure chancethings you can’t easily plug into a comparison chart.

Many naval analysts lean toward an Iowa-class ship as the best all-round design in a
late-war setting, especially at night or in poor visibility where radar rules. Other experts argue
that if Yamato got the first accurate long-range salvo, her 18-inch shells could do catastrophic
damage. Meanwhile, Bismarck fans point to her early successes and rugged hull design.

In other words: your “best battleship” probably reveals as much about your priorities as it does
about the ships themselves.

Beyond Specs and Stats: Combat Records and Legacy

Another way to rank battleships is to mostly ignore blueprints and ask:
What did this ship actually accomplish?

Under that lens, some ships jump up the list:

• U.S. fast battleships provided heavy gunfire support in major Pacific campaigns,
  shot down aircraft, and escorted carrier groups.
• British battleships and battlecruisers played crucial roles in North Atlantic
  convoy protection and Mediterranean operations.
• Smaller, older ships like Warspite or individual U.S. and Japanese
  battleships racked up impressive combat résumés despite not being “top of the spec sheet.”

Then there’s symbolic legacy. Ships like Missouri and Yamato are
now cultural icons. Museums, movies, video games, and popular books keep their stories alive,
often amplifying their reputations far beyond what a strictly technical ranking would suggest.

How to Build Your Own Battleship Rankings

If you want to make your own battleship rankings (and then argue about them on the internet,
obviously), here’s a simple, structured way to do it:

1. Pick Your Criteria

Decide what matters most to you:

• Are you a specs person? Focus on guns, armor, and displacement.
• More interested in history? Emphasize combat record and strategic impact.
• A technology geek? Weight radar, fire control, and engineering innovations higher.

2. Separate “On Paper” and “In Combat” Lists

You can absolutely have two different rankings:

• A “design potential” list that favors Yamato, Iowa, Richelieu, Littorio, and
  other advanced ships.
• A “real-world performance” list that might bump up ships that survived
  multiple wars or played key roles in decisive battles.

3. Be Honest About the Age of Battleships

By the mid-20th century, aircraft carriers and submarines had eclipsed battleships as the stars of
naval warfare. That means even the “best” battleship existed in a world where its strategic role
was shrinking. Build that reality into your rankings so you don’t over-romanticize what these
ships could actually do.

4. Embrace the Subjectivity

Ending every debate with “it depends” might not be satisfying, but it’s honest. Battleship
rankings are part engineering analysis, part historical interpretation, and part fandom. It’s okay
if your top five doesn’t match anyone else’sjust be ready to explain why.

Experiences from the Battleship Fandom Trenches

Statistics and spec sheets are great, but battleship rankings and opinions really come alive when
you add personal experience. Talk to anyone who’s actually walked the decks of a preserved
battleship and you’ll notice something: their rankings suddenly sound different from someone who
only knows these ships from books and video games.

Visit a museum ship like USS Iowa or USS Missouri and you realize
just how massive, yet surprisingly cramped, these steel giants really are. Photographs flatten the
sense of scale. Standing underneath a 16-inch turret, seeing the barrels towering over you, you
get an immediate, almost physical understanding of what “naval gunfire” means. It’s not just a
number in a tableit’s a weapon system big enough to cast a shadow over a city block.

Tour guidesoften veterans or passionate volunteersadd another layer to the “rankings and
opinions” conversation. They’ll point out the subtle advantages that don’t show up easily on a
comparison chart: how well the ship was laid out for the crew, how efficient the damage-control
systems were, how the radar rooms and plotting tables were arranged to keep information flowing
under stress. Hearing those stories, you start to appreciate why many people favor the U.S. fast
battleships as the best all-round designs: they weren’t just powerful, they were practical tools
for sustained, real-world operations.

Online, the experience looks very different but feeds into the same obsession. Naval forums and
comment sections are full of lovingly detailed posts where fans simulate hypothetical battles:
“What if an Iowa met Yamato in the Philippine Sea under overcast skies?” Someone will break down
radar ranges, shell flight times, armor penetration curves, and even crew training differences.
Others will chime in with quotes from declassified reports, memoirs, or gunnery trials. At that
point, you’re not just reading historyyou’re participating in a live-action peer review of naval
lore.

Video games and tabletop wargames add another wrinkle. Titles that feature battleships often have
to “balance” ships for fun, which can mean tweaking speeds, armor, or reload times. A ship that
was mediocre in real life might be a monster in the game, or vice versa. Players then bring those
impressions back into real-world discussions: “This ship feels weak” or “That one’s totally
overpowered,” even when the historical record says something else. It’s not historically pure, but
it does keep people engaged and curious enough to learn more.

Then there’s the emotional side. Maybe someone’s grandfather served on a particular battleship, or
they grew up near a harbor where a preserved ship is docked. That personal connection can rocket a
ship straight to the top of their list, and honestly, it’s hard to argue with that. Technical
rankings matter, but nostalgia and family stories can be just as powerful.

Put all of this together and “Battleship Rankings And Opinions” becomes less about declaring one
definitive winner and more about joining an ongoing conversation. You have the hard data: gun
calibers, armor belts, speed figures. You have the historical narratives: desperate battles,
lucky shots, heroic damage control teams fighting fires below decks. And you have the human
experiences: museum visits, veterans’ stories, online debates, and game nights where someone
inevitably yells, “There’s no way that ship should lose this fight!”

In the end, the “best” battleship is probably the one that captures your imagination and makes you
want to learn more. Rankings are just the excuse we use to keep talking about them.

Final Thoughts: Rankings as a Gateway to History

Battleship rankings and opinions are fun precisely because they’re messy. You can approach the
question from engineering, tactics, strategy, or even pop culture and get different answers each
time. Yamato impresses with raw power, Iowa with balance and longevity, Bismarck and Hood with
drama, and dozens of other ships with their quiet, stubborn service in brutal conditions.

If this topic does anything for you, let it be an invitation: go beyond the lists. Read after-action
reports, visit a museum ship if you can, talk to veterans or their families, and dig into the
design trade-offs that made each ship unique. The deeper you go, the more you’ll realize that the
real story isn’t just which battleship was “best”it’s how these steel giants shaped the people,
battles, and decisions around them.