puxflacet

USS Oklahoma - 1917 there is some swapping indeed...probably there are some bigger plans for future or who knows i'm glad that there is no skull - i favor the historical approach over the "harley-davidson"

what does that mean?

i will let you know if i love this beautiful old lady... or if i hate her...

oooh...maybe finally i will put my hands on her

so now it is pre-dread appreciation society? hmmmm... i would appreciate them

hippers bow was the least curved...

pros: shes beautiful

there is a warning before storm so you have plenty of time to prepare your strategy. it's just dynamic enviroment - not rng, becouse you can prepare and adjust brain turned off is not the same thing as rng even though the results may be the same...

i think this abbreviation is overused and completely unsuited for your statement...you mean probably variety? unpredictability? or so... gosh my whole life is RNG then

Architekton, on 24 May 2016 - 12:40 PM, said: Imho Tashkent should have had the premium 'Camo' by default ... i would vote for this...but developers have to eat also i suppose

well understadably paper ships dont have historical camos but sort of adaptations but it is way more historical and better looking than every free camo stuff - these are just horrid. i dont put them on my ships just becouse i cant stand to look at them and it may look lazy to you but in russia "blue cruiser" has some sound so no other paint job is really appropriet for that ship. people will definitely buy it anyway becouse of that trademark...but i understand why it smells for somebody

well becouse she was known as "blue cruiser"...all these camos are IRL based which is thumb up for me even when horribly overprized...now wg should get rid of that generic camo monstrosities - especially german and us type 2 camos

well magazine explosion should have its realistic animation for sure. we now have somewhat realistic sinking animation so i guess magazine detonation will be in game eventually...i also always disliked the current explosion of destroyed ships which just looks cheesy and unrealistic

nvm

i like that camo

well i'm completely aware of that but i didnt have stats for 280mm which was the original point - compare scharnhorsts firepower with other bbs...yeah, not good idea to mix irl and ingame values but it was late night attack of enthusiasm...

youre probably right...

i used these for rate of fire http://warshipstats.com/compare/

how much kilos can battleships throw on you: Colorado 960 8 2 15360 Nagato 1000 8 1.7 13600 Scharnhorst 330 9 3.5 10395 New Mexico 636 12 1.8 13738 Fuso 673.5 12 2 16164 New York 636 10 1.8 11448 Kongo 673.5 8 1.8 9698 Yamato 1460 9 2 26280

no...please dont do that

11 inches for more of a character! they fired 3.5 rounds per minute (colorado 2 and nagato 1.7) and range + dispersion should be also very favorable becouse Scharnhorst made one of the longest hits ever scored by a naval gun on an enemy ship when she struck the British carrier HMS Glorious at approximately 24 km. maybe a bit feeble caliber against bb armor but scharnhorst was also equipped with torpedos like tirpitz and had 31 knot spee + strong belt armor - so i can see viable solution for her how to deal with enemy bbs

what?!

read more carefully bro...i already said that im against them and this is forum after all so we have a discussion

i would say high school stuff...even elementary Historynerd, on 12 May 2016 - 04:13 PM, said: But, with all due respect, you base their effectiveness on a precise situation, that can or cannot happen. but this situation is what for they were originally designed. ram the enemy ship was the original idea, but you can immobilize and damage your vessel too. then they came up with torpedos on a stick attached on ships bow and finally self propelled ones which had initially low range but that didnt matter since you were suppose to fire it at point blank range... submarine warfare turned torpedo into long range sneaky monster