Bl4ckh0g

Yeah, but unlike a carrier you actually have to be in a battle and drive your ship while you giving orders for your DBs. You have like 5 second windows when you are dueling with another ship to give orders to your planes(If CAV) and that's severely limits their capabilities, sure when you are in the open without ships to engage you have time to micromanage your planes, but that's at most 20-25% of the battle's duration In actual combat(unless you want to sail straight which I strongly advise against) you barely have time to deal with your own planes.

Well, even If we assume that the planes could land and rearm, They would probably have around 1 or at most 2 squads of dive bombers or fighters. Thing is, It would not really make that much of a difference. the Ise is nearly the same ship as a Fuso,but on the converted hull she only has 4 turrets, Now if she'd get 2 Db squads with AP bombs, that do around 6-8 k damage per bomb, then maybe She could take on a Fuso, maybe Kind of the same deal with the converted Mogami, She might take on a Myoko, She might if some bombs hit. Only of course if the planes get AP bombs, and If the M6A Seiran planes can be used,but if they get other planes or AP bombs do not get implemented, then I fear they might not fit for those tiers. ... Well, maybe they could. Maybe the converted Mogami can be a tier 7 and the converted Ise can be a tier 6 without AP bombs, but then they would lose a straight up fight against same tier battleships and cruisers for better scouting ability and some moderate damage with the Dive bombers. But the planes would probably have quite lengthy rearm times since they are floatplanes. I am not sure that there is actually a place for them, their fighters would be around the same strength as the Langley/Hosho's A.k.a. absolutely useless in tier 5-6-7, maybe their dive bombers could do some damage, but certainly not enough to enable them to fight a proper ship of their class.. Again, I can only really see them as premiums, which I might add they would be quite successful at... I mean, They would be weak ships, Their only role is support, They could not take on a ship of their tier Like, the Mogami could be placed in tier 6 and have a comparable firepower for that tier, and she would be more tougher as well probably(though only slightly) and they'd have increased scouting ability with some plus DB damage, The Ise could be tier 5, They would fit that tier, with some slight balancing, giving them slightly worse gun stats to compensate the planes, They would be slightly tougher, like 5-10% than Kongo/Aoba I don't know, They could be proper ships at tier 5 and tier 6 or they could be unique premiums at tier 6 and tier 7 I'm kind of hoping for the premium status, easier to fit into the game, They can remove them more easily if they would not work out, people would actually buy them because they are quite bizarre...We shall see.

Aviation cruiser line? Would they be like any good at all? Like, Tone is at most a tier 7 ship I think and She was kind of an aviation cruiser, well she had more floatplanes than usual, buut Aviation Mogami? eeehhh I don't know, 6 guns and a lots of floatplanes? Yeah,like She might have 3 scouts in the air at the same time, but She's barely better than the Aoba. I cannot really see them as an actual line, to tell you the truth. I mean, most of these ships are at most tier 7 material, an aviation Ise is around tier 5, Aviation Mogami is tier 6, while Tone is tier 7. Like they would be nice tier 5 and tier 6 premium ships, but I doubt they could stand in a proper line. I do not really have much material on this subject but from the things I know there could be a CL/CA line from tier 4 to tier 8. Eh, I don't know I'm not an anchor-head like you guys.

Well, thing is neither tanks nor Ships used HE and HC rounds against other ships and tanks to my knowledge Yes there are things like spalling effect , but HE/HC was never the advised ammo against armored targets I think. I mean to me AP should be the main shell type while HE should be used against destroyers and to weaken a battleships AA and secondary armament, not really to kill battleships with it.

I'd say 3.1 ships feel more sturdy, and with slight modifications to the ricochet angles and such, with some damage rework of the HE shells the game can be much more fun imho. I had an idea for some time that, they should kinda rework the fires, like If you hit the Superstructure with HE then you have some chance to cause a low damage fire which does a ~3-5 k damage at max before going out and it's not stack-able and have a more serious fire which would happen if a shell hits the secondary magazine, float-plane hangar and on carriers the hangars and such other than that...Hmmm maybe reduce the HE damage a slightly bit, just a slightly so a shell at most does around ~150-200 damage from a 6" ~300-350 from an 8" if it hits the same class or a more armored one Like it would still do damage, but not really great amounts so that you can actually sink anyone with it

Yeah, Atlanta is probably will stay as a tier 7 premium, switching her is kind of a last resort option nothing more. Though putting the Oakland group to tier 6 is a very reasonable possibility, Yes It is part of the Atlanta-class, but having 2 less turrets and better AA, kind of justifies having her in the tree, I think. The reason why am I so keen on the Oakland is actually that the "opposing" tier 6 IJN CA,CL would be better off since they have, probably will have pretty rubbish armor and the 5"/38 guns were not that good against armored ships as the 6"/47 guns were. Also I'm thinking that the IJN CL line would be kind of like this: Tier 4 Sendai(nearly the same ship as the Kuma except the 610 mm torpedoes) tier 5 Agano and tier 6 Oyodo Edit: Tone probably tier 7 and Takao as tier 8 After that? no idea I just put the ships I know here I put the Agano and Oyodo in tier 5 and 6 because their guns only have around 5-6 RoF and they only have 6 guns so no higher than that sorry. Even then, If the Pensacola design study with 6 8" guns gets implemented in tier 6, the Oyodo might struggle, Of course the Aoba's RoF must be lowered to more reasonable levels, around ~4ish will do. Same with the Myoko of course, No 5 Rof on 8" guns!!!

Nah, I doubt that Cleveland would stay in tier 6, That ship is way to advanced, She's got better firepower than the CL Mogami with better protection, AA and gun performance. Having her in that spot does nasty things to tier 6 balance. And I think the Oakland-subclass from the Atlanta-class could be implemented to tier 6, since the Oakland has 6 turrets instead of the Atlanta's 8, Also the Atlanta could be switched with the Juneau since the Juneau has way better AA and more advanced as well. Brooklyn is nice at tier 8, but She's nicer as a tier 7 with slightly worse RoF. Cleveland would do well in tier 8, she has the armor, AA and guns for that role(with her historical 10 RoF) and then Worcester could be tier 9 with a Des Moines as tier 10, the CA tree would have a "super-baltimore" design with 12 x 8" guns, we made a nice topic about it, well Deamon did, Problems with the USN cruisers or something? I also made a poll topic about the Oakland and possible other tier 6 CLs as well.

That supercruiser is nearly an Alaska and I think WG said that they do not want to implement her as a top tier cruiser. To be honest You do not really need a tier 10 to have a second line.. And I think WG will move the Cleveland to tier 8, the only question is her replacement. I am kind of hoping for an Oakland/Atlanta in tier 6

Does IJN have enough cruisers for a second tree or you mean to implement Takao as a premium?

Did they like planned to move the entire population and this and do something like Laputa swimming battleship country or smthing?

Yeah, but If they would not have built the Yamato-class then Japan would have probably survived slightly longer since the resources could have been used for carrier construction and stuff, but They would have still lost the war, so in the end it doesn't really matter

Yeah, wasting 6,000 man and around 200,000 tons of steel on ships that get sunk without doing anything kinda does that to you

If I were a WWII Japanese ship builder I would smack the hell out of the guy who proposed to build the Yamato, Musashi and Shinano and build instead a fleet of aircraft carriers and cruisers like the Zao with 40 mm AA guns and 10 cm dual purpose batteries. And then probably get executed because I went up against the Emperor's Admiralty and such, but that's not important....

Just to clarify That post of mine was about a model viewer that shows the armor of the ship, not about armor mechanics and such I was not quite clear, but what I wanted to say is that WG either has to make an "armor model viewer" or give quite lengthy explanations to each ship If you want to know the armor of the ships If I misunderstand something then I'm sorry

Then technically you five-shot him, Ya moist lying basterd

Here, the North Carolina's armor I get it from Wikipedia. It's on the internet. If WG wants to implement this then they either give you a nice reading like this. Or make a multi layered model of the ship's armor layout, which takes considerable time to make. So If you want to know the ship's armor, then there's the internet. If you want to know how's that armor looks like on the ship, then you will have to wait until they implement it because they sure as hell not gonna give you a novel sized description on every ship's armor layout. and implementing takes time and resources, time and resources that can be used for making the game better. This game is far more complex than WoT and it takes way more time to implement things here.

yes because a shell in Wot at max lose 10 or 5 mm of penetration and has to penetrate one layers of armor with sometimes spaced armor A 406 mm shell loses two thirds of It's penetration from 20 km and then has to penetrate 4 or 5 layers of armor.... http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_14-45_mk1.htm here have a look at the New York's penetration because a ship doesn't just have one layer of armor throughout the whole ship, that's why they removed the armor stats from in game because they were useless...

Creating proper illustrations about the armor layout of every in game ship with different cross-sections with the armor quality of course not just the pure thickness Then making a penetration chart about every gun in game with a resolution of around 1-2 km with deck and belt penetration proofreading the whole thing implementing into the game creating a user interface that can support this debugging and testing that interface and this isn't even considering the angling and the penetration loss and decap effect of the shells when they penetrate different layers of armors... And this is just something too read, note even a tank inspector like model viewer

Who said anything about impossibility? You can implement it without problems, It would just take half a dozen people and a couple of months

a ship's armor layout is a hundred times more complex than a tank's, and the gun's armor penetration is changing by hundreds of millimeters over distance not 10 or 15 as in WoT Here:

Mostly because you'd need an entire ingame encyclopedia for giving every ship's armor layout with the gun's penetration at various ranges

I included the Grem, because She is unique in the current meta, Of course once the Russian and Italian navies make an appearance that will change, but currently She is a unique looking ship with different play style than most currently in game destroyers. If you have some ships that were prototypes or they featured advanced design features like the Yubari or they were particularly interesting in some way, like they had something that distinguished them from the more standard designs, for example particularly heavy or light armor or armament or speed or they just simply looked different. Essentially if you look at that ship and it catches your attention for some reason then It might be a nice premium.

I would say If a ship has a distinctive design that catches your eye, For example the Atlanta with the numerous 5"/38 guns or for example the Yubari which looks more "modern" than the Kuma. Essentially You need either one of these things: A name like Bismarck, Aurora or Warspite Intriguing design like Yubari, Atlanta, Gremyashchy Familiarity Like Murmansk, Sims 1. is simply does not require explanation 2. If the ship looks interesting, If it catches your eye in the port, if It looks cool, If it distinguishing herself in some way from the other ships 3. Ships for farming credits, and training, must feel familiar and effective, not exotic, since the player does not want to learn how to play the ship, He wants to farm credits effectively. Thus the ship must feel familiar but not an exact copy of an already existing ship. Preferably with some background that can validate the premium status.

I once citadel hit a Baltimore from 8 km with the stock Mogami in this patch

I kind of thought of something. Since I guess we have to wait quite a while to get a CL line for the USN, I thought that WG could make the Oakland subclass, since It's an Atlanta you can modify the Atlanta's model and make an Oakland out of it way faster than making a model from the scratch(removing two aft turrets and changing AA) and put this Oakland in tier 6 and remove the Cleveland temporary until the CL line gets implemented. This would kinda resolve the Cleveland problem faster than waiting for an entire line. So when the CL line is ready this Shceme D scout design can be placed beside the Oakland and then the CL line would go from the Oakland. Do you think that's a plausible solution? Since a couple of people voted for the Brooklyn preliminary. I am actually having some concerns about that design. I did not write anything about it, because quite frankly I know very few things about that design. I'm guessing It would probably have either 8 or 9 guns in 3 or 4 turrets with around 7,5-8 RoF which could be a proper tier 6 CL, but the problem I'm having is tied to the protection and guns of the design. If the design retains the same armor protection of the Brooklyn and the same 6"/47 guns, then I do not really think the whole problem would be solved in tier 6. One of the reasons of the Cleveland's "OPness" is due to the good armor protection and the gun's penetration. I did not really find much info about the exact penetration of the gun's, just a note on Wikipedia which says that the guns could penetrate 127 mm armor up to 14 000 meters which is really, really good, I fear it's too good for tier 6. That gun can virtually penetrate the Aoba's armor at any range. One of the biggest problem with the Aoba is her fragility, and that would not be resolved in any way, the Aoba would still be citadel hit by the Brooklyn design at any range, the only thing that would change is that you'd survive slightly more salvos. The whole design is kind of fits tier 6 , but I think the ship would be the same as the Cleveland except her lower firepower. The same heavy protection with powerful guns....It might not change much compared to the current situation. Well, of course if the ship actually has these characteristics, but since I found no info about it I cannot say anything with certainty....