Benser33

The free Sirocco from directives will get you another 250 with a mission. Any of the FR DDs available from containers will also get you an additional 250 (there are 4 available) Buying Bayard will also get you a mission for 250 tokens. Other than that, you can check https://frenchwhaling.in.fkn.space/

They also dont have heal, their advantages for survivability come from their range (which with AFT is 14km at tier 4, 15.7km at tier 7 and 16.3km at t10), their speed (especially with their +20% speed boost, enabling the t8 to reach 55knts and the t10 to reach 57) and their saturation mechanic which is unique among destroyers. Most destroyers cannot have their midship compartment saturated and always take full damage from penetrating hits to the midship, which counteracts some of the increased survivability DDs enjoy by not having a citadel. French DDs can have this compartment saturated, so once they receive enough damage to the middle of the ship any further damage sustained to that part of the ship will be halved (overpenetrations, fires and flood are not affected and continue to cause their respective damage). Since saturation essentially reduces damage from regular AP and HE penetrations the ability to saturate the middle of the ship will allow FR DDs to survive slightly more damage from these sources than other DDs. For more details on how saturation works as a concept check the wiki article or the included video.

Khaba seems fine to me atm, the differences between it and tashkent are a bit wierd since the buffs to tashkent but theres nothing wrong with Khaba that isnt a reasonable disadvantage imo.

Theres also gamemodels3d which is privately run and requires a one time donation to access most features but also had model viewer, armor viewer and module viewer. Wows-Numbers is mostly used by players for performance stats but it also has a ship comparison tool under the warships section that can be useful for comparing a ships stats on-paper (though like most it doesnt compare the benefits and deficits of a ships armor scheme). That's all I can think of when it comes to ship stats, I don't think I've needed anywhere for ingame ship info and remaining test ship info comes from the dev blog which now has a forum category.

The only way to know really is checking beforehand on one of the tool sites like https://wowsft.com/ But otherwise, 99% of ships are better with their top hulls. The only ships that come to mind that aren't "better" are all of the US DDs with C Hulls that replace a main gun with more AA and the premium US DD Monaghan which is basically two ships in one with pretty distinct differences between hulls.

Seen someone buy 50 prem containers and get 2 ships. Not encouraging.

I agree

The automatic Fighter consumable that locally protects the CV summons 1 additional aircraft. The manual Patrol Fighter consumable is unchanged.

For the worth of my assumptions, WG have just clarified the specifics; My assumptions were not correct.

I was under the assumption the shells would deal between HE and AP amounts of damage, dealing more than AP is quite a surprise. I expected the consistency of SAP to make up for having lesser damage but this will be interesting to see. Perhaps these damage values will allow the cruisers to use the SAP selection as their primary ammo type.

Wait, what?

Squall and Gale rewards are awarded over 15 wins (50 per win in Squall, 75 per win Gale) Storm and Typhoon rewards are awarded over 30 wins (100 per win Storm, 135 per win Typhoon) Hurricane rewards require 10 wins (100 per win)

I understand that your numbers were an example, though suggesting changes to how much damage is done with a regular penetration ontop of suggesting the base damage is increased results in the outcome I described of 6000 vs 13500. HE shell with a base damage of 2000 will cause 666 damage on a regular penetration (33% of base damage) multiplied by 9 shells is ~6000 damage. That is how much damage a full salvo of HE would cause to a target. SAP example base damage was 3000 damage per shell which would cause 1500 damage on a regular penetration of 50% (which is what I infered from " - pen = from 50% to 100 % of potential damage depending on full pen or overpen.") multiplied by 9 shells would result in a total damage of 13500. That table is my own creation, the shell damage and penetration values are rough averages from the t9-10 cruisers fielding 203mm guns. The SAP row there exists to show the differences between SAP and the other shell types, I have made two assumptions (below) based on the values of the Work In Progress variants of the T10 premium italian DD Paulo Emilio found here; REDDIT: - UPDATED: Italian T10 DD - Starting place and flavor and here; REDDIT: - Stats for T10 Italian Destroyer Paula Emilio shown in Sea Raptor’s CC Summit video The SAP shells penetration of 27mm is the same value of penetration you would expect from a HE shell of that calibre with IFHE. You might conclude from this that a feature of the SAP shell is HE-like penetration with values similar to that of HE with IFHE. As such, I've assumed the 203mm SAP shell would have penetration similar to a 203mm HE shell with IFHE (that's 43mm for 1/6th pen and 65mm for 1/4th). The SAP shells damage value is 2100. This value is supposed to be "between HE and AP". The regular HE and AP examples are 1950 and 2500. This puts the SAP damage value just 8% higher than that of the HE shell. My assumption is that a cruisers SAP would do closer to 10-20% more damage than its equivilent HE shell. My values are only examples based on averages and assumptions. How much damage the new cruisers will do with their shells is yet to be seen. Though, if you were shooting at a DD you could most definitely expect most AP shells to overpenetrate (as for 203mm guns 34mm of armor is required to arm them), and the 1200 regular penetration damage the SAP shells would do represents a significant gain over the 550 dmg an AP shell would cause with an overpenetration. Which ammo type to use will remain highly situational and will depend on official numbers regarding damage and penetration.

The description for SAP you are quoting is specifically for the british shell with the designation SAP or SAPBC, not for SAP shells as a concept. The confusion you refer to may come from comparing SAP to HE in the first place. The new italian cruisers do not have AP + SAP because SAP is a good alternative to HE, but because SAP is a viable alternative to AP. So, comparing SAP and HE to each other is a bit pointless, theyre both designed to be used alongside a regular AP shell, not together. Both SAP and HE provide a ship with a shell type to use against targets where AP is ineffective, but do so in different ways. I don't see any reason or need for the SAP shells to have 50% more base damage than a comparable shell of the same calibre and to also cause 50-100% of its damage on a penetration compared to a regular HE shells 33% regular penetration damage. Overall that would mean a ship with 9x203s would cause 6000 damage with a full salvo of regular pen HE but 13,500 damage with a full salvo of regular pen SAP if causing "only" 50% of its damage on a penetration. This is far too much to compensate for not having the ability to start fires. The SAP shell provides better than HE penetration and better than HE raw damage, at the expensive of not starting fires and having the potential to ricochet. When firing at a target with AP it will be entirely viable to switch to SAP to remove the possibility of overpenetrations at a slight loss in overall damage. Being able to consistently cause large amounts of regular penetration damage to a target also has the knock-on effect of reducing the targets ability to recover, because what extra damage a HE shell might cause due to fires can be repaired at 100% rate with repair party, but the additional damage caused by the raw penetrations of the SAP shells can only be repaired at 50% rate (60% for UK BBs). The mechanics proposed by WG seem sound.

Well during testing the french T10 BB was named simply "France" so perhaps theres a chance for a change before release.

Whats the point of your post? I see no mention of England or Britain? Who are you informing?

AP and SAP, no HE.

Oh you're right! Forgot about that.

Well compared to Gearing who fires the same torps it has 12@130s reload where Gearing has 10@136s reload, so it technically still is more torpedo focused than Gearing is... but its guns were already worse than Gearings as well, so why they had to bring them down further I dont understand. They're the same shells as Gearing, but 4x2 instead of 3x2. So you've got more, your first salvo in an engagement has 33% more damage in it than Gearing, but after that Gearing is firing twice as often. Gearing 1800 dmg x 20 rpm = 36,000 dpm x 6 guns = 216,000 dpm. Somers 1800 dmg x 12 rpm = 21,600 dpm x 8 guns = 172,000 dpm. With this reload nerf; Somers 1800 dmg x 10 rpm = 18,000 dpm x 8 guns = 144,000 dpm. It's not difficult to work out from that that Gearing can dish out 150% of the dpm that Somers can, while enjoying superior turret traverse, an AA suite, 10% more HP. All that Somers has over gearing are the extra 2 torpedos that reload 6s faster, 2knts of max speed and what appears to be slightly better agility. With regards concealment, Somers is better than standard Gearing, but lego mod Gearing is better than Somers at the cost of gun/torp reload. Prior to this change, Somers did not seem like a good gunboat. I do not see how Somers guns compare favourably to any other t10 DD other than Shimakaze (who is only fractionally worse)The torps and guns are comparable, the guns are extremely similar though Somers does have 144k dpm vs Shimas 135k (shima fires slightly more often and has better fire chance, somers does more damage per salvo, enough to have higher overall dpm, and turns twice as fast as shima) and when it comes to torpedos, Somers has the advantage on the range (16.5 vsd 12) and the detectability (1.4 vs 1.7), but Shimakaze has almost twice as much potential damage in a full torpedo salvo as well as significantly better flood chance. You might think after that "Ok, Somers has guns that sound similar but better than Shimas and torps that are better if you value range, worse if you value damage or probably similar overall, so what?" well, Somers is worse than Shimakaze is every other way, less HP, worse concealment, slower with worse turning, worse AA. If Somers is such a good gunboat how does it compare so poorly to other DDs in terms of gunnery and when it does compare favourably (only just) it doesnt compare favourable as a torpedo ship. Somers must be doing something that isnt obvious on paper to justify this change because by straight up comparison of its stats it doesnt look like a competitive tier 10 DD at all.

Really? Was Sieg overperforming? Every instance I've seen of it has been dreadful. Torpedo focused? The only american 4x2 gun destroyer class and it's implemented as a torpedo focused destroyer. What a waste.

I am still hoping the tier 9-10 are not the Ansaldo designs for Spain and Russia, they dont seem like good candidates to represent italy at high tier, but we shall see.

They look great and they sound sufficiently distinct, could be one of the most interesting new lines for some time!

It seems to be a typo, I believe they mean that the combat missions will reward you with the premium ship, much like the russian premiums available during Phase 2 of the RU BB event.

If you can find it on the mod section of the forum its allowed, per the rules; For anything else, that's for you to decide.