Historynerd

Besides, if someone enters a game about military ships, the least they can do is learn four (4) easy as pie acronyms. No one pretends they should learn the difference between a protected and an armoured cruiser, for example; but such a simple thing... Naval fanboyism is one thing, perhaps, but let's not dumb this down too much, please. If he speaks 500 words, can't he just learn FOUR more of them and be off with it? Or will his head explode if he does so? Seriously, why does it appear so difficult? I'm Italian and English is not my first language, but I have no problem whatsoever in using four English acronyms (which are not even words per se, moreover). This is just ridicolous.

Because "cruisers", "battleships" and "aircraft carriers" all begin with a different letter, and so do their acronyms?

Seriously, please. Learn to use the bloody search function, see that this thing has been discussed to death and that there are many good reason for them not to be implemented, and avoid bringing them back to life again only to die again soon.

I completely disagree. You don't have to be a so-called "naval fanboy" to learn these acronyms, given that they were created explicitly to simplify things. What does it take to learn them? And, as others pointed out, your alternative to "BB" means another thing, so forget about it if you don't want to confuse new players further. Your proposal is therefore completely illogical and absurd. Sorry.

Sure there is! But, while the Capitani Romani-class cruiser or super-destroyer (it depends on personal taste) sure is an interesting design, I'm not sure wheter the comparison is warranted; the 135 mm gun of the Italian design does not have enough elevation to be a DP gun, and that's a pretty apparent difference. Only if Warspite and the future RN ships would sail under this: Seriously, though... enough with the jokes. They get annoying, especially when underserved.

That is going to be slightly different: the Nelson class does not allow for all of its armament to be fired directly forwards.

Things might be a little different here than in WoT... different branch of armed forces, perhaps different styles...

I would like it very much; it should be very interesting playing the all-forward ships like the Dunkerque and the Richelieu, and others.

There is also the Kriegsmarine to consider. It should be obvious that the Royal Navy and the Kriegsmarine will be added first; then, it'll be a match-up between the Marine Nationale and the Regia Marina. I say this because it remains the fact that the Italian ships fought hard and many times, while French ships have a much shorter combat record. If the French ships come before, well, it's fine. But there's a chance that it might be the other way around. And by the way, you still haven't answered to my objection to your claim that the Italian Navy couldn't design carriers, on the other topic... Apart from all of the other considerations, your comments, while understandable, are the same as me asking in the WoT forums to stop saying the same old jokes about the Italian tanks having one gear forwards and four reverse, and stuff; they won't stop, even if I could claim as you that those are disrespectful to my country. In the end, I realized that stupid people will keep telling them, and intelligent people will check the truth with an open mind; so don't bother.

They should be discussed... ...in the threads already open, and not in billions of useless new ones that every new guy around here opens. Seriously, being part of the forum means also using it in the proper way. Failing to use the search feature, failing to wonder "gee, if this problem is so apparent, there might be a discussion on it already", failing to realize that perhaps one reason why one can't see if these discussion is already there is because of the humongous number of new threads opened each day (a good part of them of little use)... Well, then forgive us if we are a little harsh to everyone who comes here screaming in a new thread "Torps/Carriers/Battleships/A huge white whale are OP" or stuff like that.

Well, I don't claim that some of them do have quite a ring and something peculiar (including Warspite, by the way, it sounds to me like quite an imposing and powerful name); but that's what I feel. Someone else might feel differently, that's all.

Exactly! Your turn now, old chap!

...I think that the original French name was L'Entreprise, to be picky...

Isn't that a bit subjective? The beauty, even of a name, lies in the eye of the beholder.

Alright, it seems it's my turn... 1) This WWI ship was the second in a class of four 2) She was one of the few battleships not having to be surrendered at the end of the war 3) Her sinking was very publicized 4) Easy mode:

Could it be SMS Goeben, later Yavuz Sultan Selim...? Anyway, it's because the Italian Dante Alighieri was the first battleship to be laid down with triple turrets, but Viribus Unitis by a matter of days was completed first; so it's a rather dicey record. The Russian battleships all were laid down and completed after, although they decided to use triple turrets indipendently.

Um... was the world record the one of Viribus Unitis being the first battleship completed with triple turrets? Just to understand it correctly.

Just a thing: as for the Mediterranean theater, I'd say that if one counts the losses incurred by the Regia Marina at Taranto (of which, it should be remembered, only one was definitive, while the other two battleships were repaired and returned to active duty six months after that, just to be precise), then he should also count the losses incurred by the Royal Navy at Alexandria. Seems only fair.

It sure would.

Discussions such as this are pointless unless both parts are willing to concede that some of their points might not be right and that those with whom they are speaking might have a point. But thanks for the details and the mentions, guys. Those were very interesting.

Didn't they influence, to an unspecified degree, the design of the Comandanti Medaglia d'Oro-class?

@luigi1985 We appreciate that you're enthusiastic about the perspective of having the Italian ship in the game; still, this discussion is focused on the possible tech tree that can be implemented; it's not a "Regia Marina appreciation thread". Posting random pictures of warships, while it shows us that you can't wait for them to arrive (understandably so), is not very helpful, in my opinion. Also, these images are rather big, perhaps it would be better to put them under spoiler so they won't take up much space.

Well, of the MN I'm not sure, I don't know very well the French ships; perhaps the Jeanne d'Arc could be a premium? Of the RM... well, how about the Dante Alighieri? After all, she was the first ship to be built with triple gun turrets, not the least important feature in battleships.

Um, careful, we can't use Italian here. We'll be able to only in the Italian subsection, which is still to come.