mr3awsome

The Takao class will come, rest assured. When and where, however, are up to debate.

Unfortunately, even the Royal Navy cannot manage it. However, they can do a much more thorough job than at least 4 other nations.

Hard to discuss what we don't know. Simply, balance. Not all ships are created equal.

All navies did. Not all have enough to make a branch to tier 9 or 10. Katori is a tier I, Tenryuu a tier III, Kuma, Sendai, Nagara & Yuubari tier IV, Agano tier VI Or there abouts.

Aviation Cruisers and Aviation Battleships are a definite possibility in the future. As for there being separate Light and Heavy cruiser lines, I suspect that Wargaming will try to do that where possible, but its quite hard to do except for the USN & Royal Navy.

Well : - Myogi is primarily B-40 (despite what one of the above posters claims), but with B-41s guns as stock. - Senjo (Tengu in the article Tuccy linked) is based on the requirements for the Type A 1941 cruiser, particularly a visualisation made by a Japanese magazine in the 1970s - Phoenix is a 1917 Scout Cruiser study that later led to the Omaha class design. - Nicholas is a study from 1917 for a Destroyer Leader. And thats all of them.

Only one of its class completed. However, it represents an important stage of British Battle-Cruiser development, and should be a regular ship in the tree. It would be like making a T-34 Mod. 1943 or Pz-IV Ausf. H premium. Bismarck is by no means tier 10, or 9, material. Either way, Tirpitz is not radically different enough from Bismarck to mean it should be a premium. In game terms, it literally just has some additional light AA. (Dreadnoughts don't have torpedoes in the game, apparently).

Well the deck armour is made up of three armoured layers. As such, whilst it might might stop the shell from reaching the very depths of the ship, it will cause a lot of damage above the turbine rooms.

Alaska is part of a group of designs that you can make a sub-branch out of. Much like Atlanta. So hopefully not. Not really different enough from the rest of the class to be a premium. Renown should really just be a hull option and a 2 of 3 hull upgrade for the Renown class. Its not substantially different from Renown

Its worth noting that in said impossible situation when the torpedoes hit the TDS the TDS held. Unfortunately the first torpedo hit was a critical hit (as in Bismarck level critical)

KGV: The engines weren't that inefficient. A bit on the conservative side, yes, but it was easy to maintain and easy to run. And its not like her bunkerage means she can't keep up for the European war. The quad turret was perfectly fine by 1943, all first time objects have their faults. The underwater protection worked well, but yes it was too shallow. Richelieu does have the best TDS, it has to be said. However, part of the machinery thing is due to the strategy of concentrating on the Med as their main area of operations. You will never be far from port, so you don't need all the repair and maintainence area as the British or Americans, and can afford to be less conservative in terms of design of machinery, as a port is never too far away. And Richelieu's light AA was literally the worst of all the Washington Treaty battleships. And remained so until she was refitted by Uncle Sam. On top of that, her main armament had even more problems than KGVs did, and didn't achieve 2RPM until she got a make over from Uncle Sam. And you don't measure ships on deep displacement for the Washington limits. You measure it on standard displacement. So Bismarck is a much bigger cheat. When you take in to account tonnage vs capability, KGV is a lot higher, and Bismarck a lot lower, in the rankings. i.e. North Carolina, KGV, Littorio/Richelieu, Bismarck.

Yamato was in the water before Bismarck was commissioned by 16 days. The KGVs have a very competitive armour scheme, the only real problems are the TDS being a little short, and the belt being a little shallow. Nothing extreme. The guns are perfectly capable of penetrating any other Treaty battleship, whilst carrying a superior charge in each shell. The turrets did have issues, but given what happened to the battlecruisers at Jutland that is hardly surprising. Not to mention that most of those issues were sorted by 1943. As for the machinery, no it wasn't the most efficient set out there, but it was still efficient. The Littorios suffered as a result of Italian industry practicies rather than a poor design. AA armament is potent enough, but 90mm is quite small, I will admit. North Carolina is only over the displacement limit by about 2,500t, which isn't a lot. The Bismarcks are 6000t over. Everything has flaws, and vibrations I believe is the major one in North Carolina. Lastly, Richelieu. The armour scheme is no more than average. The light AA was utter trollop (until the refit in the USA), the main guns fired very slowly. The secondary armament was a mess, and a general failure. How is that the best?

More places, higher chance of getting in I think

Cruiser is an umbrella term, and there are half a dozen or so different types that could fit in the game. Whilst I don't think they should be differentiated by symbol in game, I do think that they should try to have light and heavy cruiser lines where possible to diversify the gameplay.

I'd say merge Michigan & South Carolina and Arkansas & Wyoming (with the name ship being listed). Other than that put CA2-D after Alaska then its golden.

Navyweaps has it down as 805lb of Torpex (which is equivalent to 1207.5lb of TNT)

Except the Crown Colony's & their derivatives used the Mk IX torpedo, with the Mk IX** having approximately 1208lb of TNT equivalent going 11,000 yards at 41 knots.

True. Rate of fire is lower than the British gun though. And whilst there are the same number of torpedo tubes, the British torpedoes in question are superior (more range at a higher speed with a larger warhead). Gotta love QF 6"/50 Mk V with 3"/70 Mk 6 secondaries

Les Bonnes Nouvelles, les enfants! Update: BB South Carolina to tier 3 BB Wyoming to tier 4 BB New York to tier 5 BB New Mexico to tier 6 BB Colorado to tier 7 BB North Carolina to tier 8 BB Iowa to tier 9 BB Montana to tier 10.

Lower guns dispersion? Much beefer anti-aircraft battery? Better torpedoes? And if worse comes to worse, we can always resort to the Post War modernisation programme. In regards to heavy cruisers (and their killers) there are designs.

The bridge is built into the turret's barbette.

That depends on Daimon. You'll have to work it out between you. Anyway, update: CL Tenryu moved to tier 3 CL Modernised Tenryu removed from tree As seen in the latest blog article on Japanese cruisers.

Of course, welcome back.

Bismarck shot at the water to create water spouts to try and down the Swordfish.

They might actually, the 18" Mk I shells are smaller than the 1920 shell by around 12". So they should fit if the 1921 18" shell is larger than 67.25" long for APC, (if the loss of length from 1920 to 1921 is the same for the APC as it is for the HE it should work) If necessary the lighter shell guns can be stock and the heavy shell guns elite?