Deamon93

Lesta studio(who actually develops the game) is in St Petersburg. As far as i recall it's a short stroll between their office and the naval archives(and where Aurora will come back after the works on her are over).

I was in Wyoming and two Langleys kept focusing on me. Out of 24 torpedoes fired only a single one hit me. Granted it's relatively easy to avoid two squadrons from two different players but still it's possible, unless the CV player is really good.

MN is Marine National though :p. Anyway at the moment there aren't that many premiums(compared to the plausible ones i found) so hard to say. I hope that WG will give us some info on that regard at Gamescom so i can pick accordingly.

I)Italy joined in 1940 II)The French Navy was scuttled in 1942(after Operation Torch) III)Pearl Harbor is 7/12/1941 Anyway last time we asked it was for marketing reason, being the Russian one their largest market(although apparently the EU server has higher peaks than the RU one)

The wearing of the gun wasn't considered an issue because it was possible to change the barrels without any particular issue. With all considered having a gun with a higher performance wasn't a huge drawback since they were supposed to be based either at La Spezia or at Taranto and both both had all the infrastructure required to change the barrels(and the process wasn't that complicated considering the size of them). The quality of the shells was a problem but similar issues were also present in other nations. Of course it's an assumption. I made a whole tree based on assumptions since there's no way to be sure. Still i think it would be a good start and from there WG may find a way to balance them out(if required of course). I haven't said it was impossible but more complicated than the US counterparts(i don't know the T-34 too well so i can't say on their regard). In any case we're going a bit OT here ^^

Yeah that's true. Still she won't show up anytime soon so who knows how WG will implement her. I have to check for her optical equipment, it will take some time. I have to read the book from Bagnasco on them where there's all the info.

In some cases the shells were well made and it was possible to achieve consistent grouping even from very long range(i don't recall in which battle of Sirte Littorio was able to fire more consistent groupings than Vittorio Veneto even though she was some 10.000 yards further away just thanks to properly made shells). In any case i'm sure WG uses a single formula for every gun, it would be a nightmare otherwise. The simpliest way to balance her out would be to give her good range(ie between Iowa and Yamato level range). At those ranges having a lowish RoF won't be that bad Tigers and Panther were a nightmare to keep operational on the field because regular maintenance wasn't easy to achieve(to reach vital points such as transmission and what not was overly complicated).

Here are the stats from navweaps of Littorio and Yamato guns. Yamato Range Side Armor Deck Armor 0 yards (0 m) 34.01" (864 mm) --- 21,872 yards (20,000 m) 19.43" (494 mm) 4.30" (109 mm) 32,808 yards (30,000 m) 14.19" (360 mm) 7.43" (189 mm) Note: This data is from "Battleships: Axis and Neutral Battleships in World War II" for a muzzle velocity of 2,559 fps (780 mps) and is based upon the USN Empirical Formula for armor penetration. Littorio Range Side Armor Deck Armor 0 yards (0 m) 32.07" (814 mm) --- 19,685 yards (18,000 m) 20.06" (510 mm) 2.86" (73 mm) 30,621 yards (28,000 m) 14.93" (380 mm) 5.11" (130 mm) Note: This data is from "Battleships: Axis and Neutral Battleships in World War II" for a muzzle velocity of 2,789 fps (850 mps) and is based upon the USN Empirical Armor Penetration Formula. Granted Yamato fired much heavier shells but in terms of penetration the 381/50 isn't that far behind. It had also accuracy issues but they were related to the shells primarily which were inconsistent in quality.

True but the G.55 had the advantange of being able to house the DB 603 engine without any big change/the G.56 isn't that different from the original G.55) while the Bf 109 wasn't able to. You had to design a whole new frame and the first fighters with DB 603 engine(the Ta 152) came too late for the party.

Plus the lack of serious specialist planes. Most of the planes were re-used on different roles to supplement the needs. Anyway the English Wikipedia has an Italian book as source for that so perhaps it will be possible to track it down. It will take a while but there's no rush so. Most of them were able to carry a reasonable payload, that's true(compared with the dedicated bombers of their own nation of course). Italy maintained its independence as far as planes were concerned for quite some time, making even better prop driven planes than the German counterparts of the time(G.56, the DB 603 engined variant of the G.55 which roflstomped what the Germans were able to throw at it during tests at Reichlin). Personally i find the choice of having jets questionable, especially since that from tier IV to tier VII(stock) there's a relatively gently improvement and from VII(upgraded) to tier X there are leaps forward. I can more or less find counterparts for most of them but it will be complicated for the higher tiers: IV(stock): CR.1 IV(upgraded)/V(stock): CR.20 V(upgraded)/VI(stock): CR.32 VI(upgraded)/VII(stock): CR.42 VII(upgraded)/VIII(stock): Re.2001 VIII(upgraded)/IX(stock): Re.2005 IX(upgraded)/X(stock): Re.2006 X(upgraded): ?? Excluding the Re.2001 all those are land based planes which will required some modifications. They are, more or less, the contemporary counterparts of the planes in the US and JP CV lines. The issue is that there's no good jet counterpart, unless you want to go full retard with the G.91.

PLANES NOTE: my idea for the planes carried by the carriers is to have fighter bombers only as much as possible. There are a few reasons behind this choice: 1)Italy relied heavily on fighter bombers, strapping bomb on whatever plane available 2)The Italian carriers were supposed to provide first and foremost AA cover, they weren't intended to be heavy hitters on their own(hence why both Sparviero and Aquila were supposed to carry only Re.2001s) 3)It would be an unique flavor with the ability to use the planes available both as fighters or as dive bombers, depending on the situation. 4)The number of planes carried was quite limited and having planes able to fulfill multiple roles would somewhat solve this problem The only issue is that i don't know if the game will be allowed(technically). From a balance point of view having full fighters or full dive bombers shouldn't be that OP because you gain flexibility but you would be like a jack of all trade master of none(so specialized planes will be superior). Historical projects G.50 A/N A project which was developed for Svarviero and Aquila. Considering how the planes are currently placed finding a spot for this particular aircraft will be quite challenging, being too strong for the fighters carried by the tier VI CVs but too weak to compete against the ones carried by the tier VII(considering the upgraded ones). It would act as a fighter-bomber(something which in theory would give an unique flavor to the Italian CV line and would somewhat compensate for the lack of numbers), being able to carry out both the role of the fighter and of the dive bombers(with a 250 kg bomb as payload). Re.2001OR The plane which was picked for the Italian carriers. It would placed at tier VII(upgraded) and tier VIII(stock). Compared to the counterparts(F4F3 and A6M2) it would be weaker as a fighter(having a lighter armament) but it would compensate its inferiority as a fighter with the ability to carry a considerable payload. This plane was able to carry a standard 250 kg or a 640 kg AP bomb, derived from the 15" shells of the 381/50(the gun of the Littorio-class) or a 600 kg torpedo. Ideally it would be the only type of plane carried by the carriers(being able to fulfill all the roles) FIGHTERS III)CR.1 - TS-1 - 1MF IV)CR.20 - F6C -A2N V)CR.32 - F4B -A4N VI)CR.42 - F3F -A5M VII)Re.2001 - F4F3 - A6M VIII)Re.2005 - F4U - A7M(N1K5-A) IX)Re.2006 - F8F - J7W1(A8M) X)// - F2H - J8N1 TORPEDO BOMBERS III)BR - DT - 1MT IV)BR.1 - T3M - B1M V)BR.2 - T4M - B3N VI)// - TBD - B4Y VII)Re.2001 - TBY - B5N VIII)G.55S - TBF - B6N IX)// - AD1 - B7A X)// - AD2 - R2Y DIVE BOMBERS IV)// - BM.2 - D1A1 V)CR.32 - SBU - D1A2 VI)CR.42 - SBC - D3A1 VII)Re.2001 - SB2U - D3A2 VIII)Re.2005 - SBD2 - D4Y2 IX)Re.2006 - SB2C - D4Y3 X)// - XSB2D - J5N1 There are blank spots which would need to be filled eventually.

Nice images, well done!

Truth? So since i'm wrong tell me how Bismarck and H-39 would compete with the current and future counterparts. Besides i'm not saying i'm an expert but i checked since i did a whole tree pretty much by myself for my own nation.

All right here is time to clear out few things: 1)Deutschland as tier VI BB won't be OP. Why? Because she isn't a BB to begin with but a slow heavy cruiser with larger caliber guns and overall crappy protection. 2)Scharnhorst would feel a bit out of place in the BB line, she is more suited in the BC line(although even there she would have some issues finding a place). 3)O-class is pretty much a faster, less protected Scharnhorst and i hardly see her above Scharnhorst(in a strait up fight the latter should most likely win) 4)Bismarck at tier IX would get shot to pieces 5)H-39 at tier X would get shot to pieces Personally i don't know how WG would link the final projects under the Kaiserliche Marine with Bismarck&co but i'm sure they won't do as you suggested.

Personally i find those less scary than what i placed at tier IX and X in my Italian tree

There are also other examples(B-65, the projects prior to projekt 69 just to name a few) I said hard to balance because they are just evolution of the Deutschland-class. Their OPness isn't granted, not like a 37 knot Zara look-alike with improved armament and AA. She should be part of the BC line which, in theory, is plausible to make. I don't think that line will be the first because Bismarck won't be featured in there.

Personally i don't know any CA project, excluding Admiral Hipper and the complicated to balance Deutschland, D-class and P-class. We'll see anyway.

Defining the Germans cruiser as OP is a bit too much since the bulk of it will be light cruisers and all post WWI ones weren't exactly great. Technically should be a cruiser but her placement is complicated. She can't go too high otherwise DM&co would rip her in moments and she can't go too low because otherwise she would be too OP. I assume she could go at tier VII or VIII, depending on balance.

From what the devs said they focus on having one line per class for every nation but, during the development phase, they worked on the two starting nations simultaneously. Hopefully they'll do that again but until they officially confirm something it's pure speculation.

As far as we know Germany will be the fourth nation so there won't be any German BB line anytime soon. At least this is what we currently know and WG will surely release some more info about it at Gamescom

The Yorktown-class will most likely be part of the second CV line of the US tree. As of now the priority is to add new nations but they'll come eventually

What i meant is that there was a Takao-class cruiser ingame and she should be back(hopefully). A better option would be leaving Takao as standard and have Maya as premium. That should work, at least in theory(of course just personal opinion).

There was her sister Atago as premium, she was removed to avoid newbies playing at tier VIII.

The Do 217 was much larger and heavier. Moreover having larger planes on carriers which had a limited plane loadout with much smaller planes would be bad.

Historynerd, on 06 July 2015 - 08:28 PM, said: Yes. Wasn't it also called Motobomba FFF, or am I mistaking it for another weapon? As far as i recall yeah, i'm not 100% sure. Dai2, on 06 July 2015 - 08:31 PM, said: Hey guys what about giving to some of those high tier WG fake CVs one of the two anti-ship bombs?(the one who sunk the roma) They were launched by medium bombers, not exactly suitable for a carrier