Historynerd

But that's the point of Kirov, to use its range, good penetration and flatness of trajectory to take out enemies. It pays with a low durability; it can hardly take anything, not to mention that your maneuverability is also low and therefore you can't even wiggle. The Omaha has smaller guns with less favourable arcs of fire, but it can take damage better, and it can turn on a dime,

Apart that it might be a tad difficult to shoot with a 152 mm gun from that distance, if you shoot at max range with these guns (apart those of the Kirov, which should be used cautiously) you're doing it wrong.

All Tier 5 cruisers can be penned by 152 mm guns; the 180 mm just does it better and does more damage.

Great! I hope you'll find it full of interesting lines of thought!

Whoops, sorry for noticing this so late! Anyway, sad to see you leave, and best of luck for the future!

Should we ask why, or is the answer apparent?

Without mentioning that the big damage to the Dunkerque was mostly done by a later torpedo attack, which got a smaller ship anchored near it which unfortunately carried depth charges; the subsequent explosion made it sink in shallow water (difficult not to, since it was like having 10 torpedoes go off at the same time at the same place!). Anyway, the Marine Nationale kept a working squadron (built around the Strasbourg) until 1942. The ships were not just left in port to rot. But it's only battles and other interesting stuff that gets people's attentions...

Unlikely, since WG has mentioned that a French premium might come before the end of the year. Anyway, allow me to point out that the Marine Nationale's activity was not restricted to just Mers-el-Kebir and Toulon.

I think it would be useful to mention another instance in which the Pugliese TDS was put to test, although in a rather unexpected way. The targeted ship was the battleship Giulio Cesare, but it was not hit by a torpedo, but it was hit by the force of an air-dropped bomb that exploded right next to the hull, during the bombardment of 8 January 1941. Unfortunately, we don't know the exact kind of bomb. Anyway, the blast caused a hole some 12 square meters big, and the cylinder was completely collapsed; however, the internal bulkhead was completely intact. This event might also be interesting to discuss another factor often brought to light when the Pugliese system is under examination, i.e. its reportedly requirement of long repair times, given its complexity. However, the Giulio Cesare remained in Genoa (where she was sent for repairs) only for 12 days, in which the cylinder must have been replaced in the collapsed section. I do not know enough to suggest comparison with other torpedo defense systems, yet at first glance this does not seem a very long time to repair what would arguably be the most difficult part of the Pugliese system. Also, many thanks to @stefsap for bringing this event to light on his blog, which absolutely deserves a look!

Right. In terms of reacting to CVs, her best weapon should be maneuverability. Torpedo protection shouldn't be that different from those of other battleships. When hit amidships, the Pugliese cylinders held up well enough by themselves (ignoring other design flaws and hurried fitting out); and when she was hit in the most vulnerable section (the rudder and screws area), the Vittorio Veneto came out better than either the Bismarck or the Prince of Wales. Belt protection is going to be fine; citadels are going to come either by close range shots or by really punchy guns (maybe the 40cm of the Yamato can reliably punch through it consistently). However, it's not going to be advisable to stay at long ranges; deck armor is a completely different story. Also, her bulkheads might not be that good. And, interestingly enough, it looks like the aft bulkhead had a higher maximum thickness than the fore one (280 vs 210 mm). ...Maybe with the Littorio showing your broadside is going to be a good idea, instead of going frontally?

Of course... How could we forget about it?

I think that the 265 mm value must be either a mistake or a typo... didn't Wg say that one of the pros of the German BB line would be its survivability or something? As for the fictional reconstruction... I think it was inevitable. Had these ships remained in service, would it have been possible that its secondaries and AA armament could be significantly improved without altering their superstructure? As for myself, I don't find myself that outraged... but that's just how I feel.

That she is; unfortunately, she has little to differentiate herself from her sisters. Even Roma, the most peculiar of the three that got in service, is different only in small details.

True. Damn it; now I won't be able to sealclub under the Tricolore, just because those pesky American, Japanese and Russian ships got there first! Crossing my fingers for Montecuccoli. C'mon, WG. Hitting a target 23'000 yds away with a 6-inch gun deserves some loooovveeee!

True that. So, I guess it's fingers crossed!

You're not wrong. However, unfortunately Italian ships are relatively little known. Say "Yamato", "Iowa", or "Bismarck", "Hood", "King George V", and you'll get everyone in the room turning their heads towards you. Say "Roma", "Pola", "Raimondo Montecuccoli"... maybe one head or two will turn, if you're lucky. In this respect, Italian premiums are not going to allow WG to milk players very much...

...So, I guess that "the German BBs won't have torps" doesn't apply to premiums... Oh, well. No big deal. Not a bad ship, either,... ...if it's confirmed, and doesn't turn out to be a red herring.

Well, unfortunately, the Fiume got sunk only a little while after receiving this camo, so we don't have a clear picture... Still, wouldn't be too bad. As a premium DD... how about the Augusto Riboty? A sweet main armament of eight 102 mm guns (five on a broadside), top speed of 35 knots, four 450 mm torpedo tubes. Don't know about you guys, but I think I'd have fun with this baby. I like them DDs to have many guns... Plus, this old barge fought both wars, got off scot-free and became the most active WWII Italian destroyer! By the terms of the peace treaty, it should have been given to the Soviet Navy, but since it was both old and worn out, they refused and took some cash instead; so the gallant little ship was scrapped, instead.

I can understand your skepticism, but it was definitely the camo in this case, no weird visibility effects or anything. Found the pic I was talking about! Here it is:

Well, one of them is this: I'll try to take a scan of another picture I have on a magazine, which might be the only one that gives us a peek of the scheme. I wouldn't sneeze before a destroyer. Italian DDs, although not as "gunny" as their Russian counterparts, and although not as unorthodox as their French rivals, might be somewhat interesting. Deamon93 would love to get his hands on one of the Leone-class.

How do you mean, exactly?

Alongside with some less nice discussion, for which I'm partially to blame; I apologize, I tend to get sidetracked in discussions like these... Well, make that three navies; the Marine Nationale might have been from a republican country, but it remained "La Royale" nevertheless! If I'm not mistaken, some pictorial evidence points to the fact that, immediately before Matapan, the Fiume was given a camo, although low-quality pictures don't tell much details about it. In any case, the Gorizia might be better reserved for some regular hull, maybe the second one (and adding a beefed-up imaginary one, to boost the AA value, otherwise at Tier 8 it might not be sufficient).

I'd settle for the cruiser line in the latter half of 2017...

Yes, they were separated by a strong bulkhead to ensure that at least two guns would remain in action. In a thread about French BBs, someone suggested as an alternative (because this looks a bit difficult) to give a strong boost to turret survivability.

What exactly is the definition of "attrition rate"? Anyway, the war as a whole caused the Italian merchant fleet to be pretty much decimated. In 1940 there were some 786 ships for 3.300.000 t, and at the end of the conflict remained only 95 for 300.000 t; of roughly 25'000 registered sailors, 7164 were listed as killed or missing.