Deamon93

You mean this bad boy? If so yeah, it was a copy of the Italian W 120/500 x 2.6. For whomever isn't familiar the name has a logic: W(Whitehead, the place in which the torpedo was developed and produced) 200(the weight of the warhead in Kg), 500(the caliber in mm) and 2.6(the length in m). Anyway this particular torpedo is particular(if not weird), at least compared to the standard torpedoes dropped by planes.

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WTGER_PreWWII.htm http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WTGER_WWII.htm Here are links with info regarding German torpedoes

A ship able to go at around 9 and 10 times the speed of sound? A must have! Joking aside i wonder if it's a graphical problem of what(due to the 3 fps which is quite low).

Yamato took part in the naval engagements around the Philippines. Granted it's not much but still something. Besides naval engagements don't mean anything otherwise Bismarck would be added eons later than Littorio because Bismarck and Tirpitz compared to Littorio and Vittorio Veneto saw minimal action. We know that it won't be the case, otherwise a rebellion would start because reasons.

First things first: Spanish ships did see action, although against each other in the Spanish Civil War(since the Republicans and the Nationalists got a chunk of the original Navy). In any case naval engagements don't mean anything as far as picking nations are concerned. Moreover the whole point of this topic isn't having Spain next but to bring attention to some ships which most of the people don't know.

I don't know but those guns act as secondary armament in cruisers(just like the 100/47 did for all the older cruisers). Not the greatest gun against ship, granted, but the impact would be marginal.

So this is pretty much a hybrid between Duca d'Aosta and Duca degli Abruzzi. I guess the placement of this particular project depends on how the Condottieri-class as a whole gets arranged. In any case it's an interesting ship indeed

Espana is overtiered. She is comparable to the tier III but with the disadvantage of having a strange turret placement(making the full broadside more complicated), less protection and a lighter displacement. At tier IV she would meet something like Wyoming and, most likely(although not anytime soon) Conte di Cavour and Caio Duilio as originally constructed. How on earth is she supposed to fight against ships which have twelve of thirteen guns? She would get wrecked in an instant. Ideally would be better to have lines for each nation inside that big tree, wherever possible of course. Still bringing light to classes which are unknown to most people isn't bad, on the contrary. Maybe WG won't even consider this work but neither mine is safe from that.

Espana is a proper dread, although she is quite small compared to the rest. Personally i would wait and see how Mikasa behaves before evaluating how pre-dreads would be worth.

An insult? Then i could say the same for the Italian ships in the Russian tree but my pride doesn't blind the fact that that happened. In any case i haven't considered this particular class for my tree as premium because Dante Alighieri suits that role just fine already, still their presence is based by facts and not by alliances.

Nice pics, thanks! lol. Joking aside that pesky spot is the only one without a ship, excluding the CV line(which is more complicated and doesn't have a really high priority). After that i can focus on finding more info on the more obscure ships(Maestrale II, proto-Littorio, the Ansaldo cruisers and finally the carriers).

You also forgot the Italian 135/45(32,7 kg with a muzzle velocity of 825) which would be the gun of the high tier DDs.

H-39 had the same layout of Bismarck, at least as far as i know. The Bismarck AA was crap. Two Stringbags were lost in a surprise night attack at Taranto and Bismarck isn't even able to defend herself in day light knowing she was chased? That's a retarded excuse. The point is simple: her AA was utterly garbage. The reasons are multiple: -She had mixed mounts for the 105/60, making the FCS work quite complicated due to the different speeds between the mounts -The 37/80 was garbage, being hand loaded with a very low RoF(30ish as far as i recall) -The number of 20/65 was limited(i don't recall exactly how many by the time she was sunk but a handful) When she sank/got scuttled she was a useless hulk since all her armament was disabled and so on. Granted it's a good thing staying afloat but if you can't retaliate isn't that great. Besides her rudder was indeed a weakspot which could have been overcome, just like Italian engineers did with Littorio(the auxiliary steering gear saved the day a few times) Tirpitz was a sitting duck for most of her carrer. Ironically Germany could have scuttled the real ship and replaced her with a fake one and the result would have been the same. Or even better keep the original and build fakes in other fjords because why not having multiple of them to scare the crap out of the British. Caliber doesn't mean much. As example the Italian largest gun actually built, the 381/50, had penetration values more or less comparable to larger caliber guns(and with proper shells they were able to fire consistently at the target but thankfully in here industrial inconsistency won't be much of a problem). In any case the German 380 mm gun wasn't bad and it will be good enough at tier VIII without any major problem.

Most likely WG will release information on her(and most likely on the German tree) at Gamescom. I don't recall the exact dates but they should be in August.

Quite a strange definition of "new" since there are two clones(Diana being a clone of Aurora and Marblehead being another clone of Omaha), an old tier II destroyer(Tachibana) and a really new ship(Mikasa). Personally i find the choice of the cruisers questionable while Tachibana was expected(where's Smith? I want those fast loading torps now!) and Mikasa was an unexpected surprise. We'll see when those get added anyway.

Good luck in making a clone feel unique and interesting. Arkansas is like a stock Wyoming with the advantages of having a lot more upgrade slots(six instead of two). She isn't the most interesting of all times but if you put some credits into her she can easily become decent(and she would pay for herself relatively quickly being a premium and all).

Wyoming represents the class while Arkansas ingame represents herself as built, simple as that.

Arkansas is just like stock Wyoming with very minimal differences. She is just a clone of her standard counterpart with more upgrade slots and without the upgraded self(since Wyoming never saw action in WWII).

In Tashkent case was even worse since the armament wasn't available(and wasn't even ready by the time the Russians got her). Taken from a nice topic on NA(http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/9009-tashkent-the-blue-cruiser-of-the-red-fleet)

News on her will be given in August, most likely during Gamescom. You forgot the coordinates

Well DP mounts started appearing relatively late(the first with only DP mounts was North Carolina i believe). Up to that point having secondary and tertiary armament was common.

In reality that's Tirpitz, Bismarck had even worse AA. In any case that page is badly made because it mixes refits. The best way of portraying it would be to compare the original designs and then evaluate the refits. Fixed the -1, don't worry .

I'm downloading the patch without any issue.

The part regarding the AA not being able to track Swordfishes is a myth. What's true however is the fact that the AA on Bismarck sucked terribly: 1)there were mixed mounts for the 105/60, making the FCS work impossible due to different angular speeds(so it was impossible to bring all guns to bare at the same time) 2)The 37/80 was horrible being hand loaded with a very low volume of fire 3)The number of 20/65 was low so again the volume of fire sucked.

Italy? The biggest "super battleship" considering the time of her development is Cassone(developed prior WWI). I'm not aware of any ships armed with guns larger than 16"(UP.41), at least as far as post treaties ships are concerned. Even then UP.41 was discarded by Admiral Cavagnari who preferred a second set of Littorio-class battleships(Roma and Impero) over her.