Trainspite

Independence (1/1/1) : 20Independence (2/1/0) : 17New Mexico : 20 Cleveland : 24 Farragut : 25Arizona : 19Shinonome : 20Mutsu : 21Ryūjō (1/2/2) : 20 -3 = 17 - Very rarely do I meet I ship I despise. This one happens to be one of them though. Can't seem to get her right.Fusō : 18Aoba : 26Fubuki :17Graf Spee : 24Bayern : 5 Ernst Gaede : 18Warspite : 17 Leander : 21 Molotov : 16 Budyonny : 14Gnevny : 17Dunkerque : 14 + 1 = 15 - Fast, flexible, reasonably tanky, guns with the best pen at tier 6. Easily able to outplay other tier 6 BBs.Anshan : 17Duca d'Aosta : 22Perth : 29

Hood's sisters. Equivalent paper designs to the ships in game. The examples I gave already. Where possible, WG would use a real ship over a paper ship. Using an Independence design study over Independence herself would be another. In this case, WG would most likely use Hood's never built sisters over Hood herself. There are only 2 RN BBs that existed that can make tier 8, KGV & Vanguard, and most seem to not like 14" KGV at tier 8, reducing it to 1 for them. It's not might, it's definite. 5 of the 6 tier 8, 9 and 10 RN BBs would be paper designs, since Vanguard & KGV perform the same role and neither fit a BC line. All the BC lines don't really die out. They become fast BBs, evolved from the lineage of the BCs. Hood to J3 is obvious, as are the German BCs, always well protected, but slightly slower. Kii is an up-armoured Amagi. The USN ships, even with the poor 7" to 5" belt on Lexington get a 12" belt with the 1918 designs at tiers 8 and 9. The list below is far from perfect, but easy enough to fill out. The doubts for me are the German T-X, Japanese T-VI, and the gaps in the USN tree, mainly from a gameplay perspective if the ship can be balanced at that tier. Nation III IV V VI VII VIII IX X RN Invincible Lion Tiger Renown Hood (Admiral or F3) J3 "Magnificent" G3 "Trafalgar" K3 "Triumph" KM Von der Tann Moltke Derfflinger Mackensen Ersatz Yorck "Falkenhayn" GK 9 "Kronprinz Rupprecht" SGK 4542 "Prinz August Wihelm" SGK 5041 "Ulrich von Hutten" IJN B-41 "Shiomi" B-40 "Myōgi" Kongō B-59 "Shari" B-62 "Kisokoma" Amagi Kii Number 13 "Izumi" USN Design 143 "Kearsarge" Lexington BC "Constellation" Scheme C 1918 "United States" Scheme D 1918 "Constitution" Having fast and slow BBs at tier 7 for the RN couldn't be done without Hood or an Admiral, unless you use F3. Which doesn't solve the point that it is a paper ship replacing a real one. You have Hood & Nelson at tier 7. Designs like F3 & faster QE design studies also fit into the tier. But there are no others. She is not the perfect candidate for a premium. That is like saying Bismarck is the perfect candidate for a premium. Because she is famous, and slightly different to Tirpitz. The only difference would be that Tirpitz got completed, while Anson, Howe & Rodney didn't. Just because she is a loner is no reason for it. Otherwise, other famous loners wouldn't be in the tech tree (Bertin, Algerie, Bogatyr, Shimakaze, Tashkent, Hiryu). Not all of those are that famous, which is the diference with Hood. But fame alone is the only reason. Making money off the name, at the expense of the BC tree. The only reason she is a premium is because she is famous and WG want the money off her. That is it. She fits far better as a T7 regular with 3 easy hulls, but WG want the money, and that is it. It was never an obvious decision. Might be expected from WGs reputation, but Bismarck is not a premium. Nor Iowa. etc. There was hope WG would do the same for Hood, and stick to more obvious and better fitting, yet still famed premiums. Warspite, Rodney, Prince of Wales, Queen Mary, Repulse, Agincourt, etc. etc. Hood definitely fits into the BB class. There should be no debate on that. She is arguably more BB than BBs like Kongo. Or Dunkerque.

Well, I would imagine Emerald at tier 5 as a quirky ship, one that doesn't fit in the tech tree, a la Atlanta, or that style of premium. HE, 10km (or 8km if WG are feeling stingy) torps and a few other features which I would have to work on, and I think she should be good as a tier 5 premium, with interesting features, but not very forgiving. Definitely better than the Krym. In my mind she is simply too powerful at tier 4 and will overshadow Danae. Hatsuharu was decent for me. Better than Fubuki at least, since I could dodge, though I feel hamstrung by having either 4 guns and 6x 10km, or 5 and 6x 6km. I alternate between them, though not always to the best of results. I would take Shinonome over either, but that is a ship I have never played. 6 torpedoes feels quite limited, and Gallant will be better in that respect, having a wider area of influence or so. I prefer 10km torps because I need that few extra kms of breathing space, to account for objects that get in the way. Like Islands, spotter planes and alikes. Plus not having CE makes it difficult to use the faster torpedoes effectively. I would usually get caught and then focused down if I did that, and the torpedoes would only have a slightly better chance of getting hits in. It would be preferable for enemy ships to get less reaction time, but for me, it is mostly hit or miss, and not a lot inbetween, so I would prefer a 10km option at least for Gallant. Maybe 10km and 8km could be options a la Sims or Anshan. That blue and red camo should be re-labelled as something else in game. It annoys me. Also hiding the only historical camo carried (That Repulse like one may have been planned, but not applied). behind a huge pay-wall is a distinct turn off. Not like I was planning to buy her anyway, being stubborn and not wanting to go against muh tech tree. You take that slander against those tier 5 DDs back! T-22 & Mutsuki are my 1st and 4th best performing DDs out of the 8 or so I have played respectively, in terms of damage at least. They are held back by silly decisions like T-22s poor smoke, and Mutsuki only getting 2 guns, but they are alright, you skreb. I did draw up a full table, showing their respective performance with me to others, Minekaze being the worst, mainly due to poor performance after the nerf as I had forgotten how to Minekaze. But then forum monster swallowed it.

They could, but at this point I would prefer a pure BB line, and a pure BC line, with a modernised Admiral as a tier 8 premium, and F3 as the regular tier 7 BC. Not exactly the same as Arizona. Arizona is the latter of the two ships of the Pennsylvania class, and Pennsy is a good candidate for the tier 6 in a second USN BB line. Hood breaks the lead ship in tech tree rule, unless there are sub-classes that are significantly different. Hood & her never where sisters were not significantly different, though WG have been bending the rules with examples of Lenin/Minsk. Either way, it is bending the rules for money. To me that makes no sense. Ships of 1 in a class are still better than a paper ship in a tech tree. Case in point for me would be Algerie over C5A3 (Martel). In the end WG made the mistake of downtierring one of them, but there is no need to make Algerie the premium if they were both tier 8. Shimakaze over V6 Super Shima. Tashkent over Udaloi (if you had the choice at first). Premiums shouldn't get priority in my mind. Important, but not at the expense of the free to play content. Ranger or Hiryu over equivalent designs and alike. Hood over her equivalent never built sisters. BCs are likely to have their own tree. The British, Germans and Japanese can all manage one with extreme ease. Not having one leaves far too many premiums sitting around, and especially with the RN, creates more premiums than regulars. I can't see it not happening, as WG would be stupid to leave it out. Not too soon, but unless the game completely dies, then no. BC lines will appear, that "should" be a forgone conclusion. BC is just a definition and a naming theme that varied from nation to nation, I am all too aware of Hood being far more fast BB than BC. Having 2 Fast BB lines and 1 slow BB is a bit more confusing to say than 1 Slow BB, 1 Fast BB & 1 BC for example. (Based off my RN Tech tree proposal. Revenge, Nelson, N3 are the slow; QE, KGV & Lion are the Fast, Lion, Renown, Hood & G3 for BCs.) - The one least likely to appear is the slow one. But that may be split off at some point in the future of the game.

*glares witheringly*

Yes, but with the case of Hood, her fame dragged her out of the tech tree effectively. There was no other reason behind it, she wasn't suited to it, as she is not an oddball like Atlanta, or a duplicate class like Kamikaze. Other famous or museum ships stay in the tech tree, but WG decided that Hood was not one to miss getting money off of. Warspite as example keeps QE for the BB line free. Hood doesn't, without bending the trends WG have set in place. I know I am pedantic about this stuff, but I do feel it is a detriment to the RN BC line, and then again most things that don't match up to what I expect, especially RN, get the ire of my words. *Drinks tea disdainfully*

That was wishful thinking from the start. The whole point of Hood being a premium was to make money off her fame, and basically nothing else.

I would like to note that money-grabbing Hood came with making her a premium in the first place, instead of a regular tier 7 BC as the lead of her class, as I would have desired. Given I am stubborn git, that reason alone means I won't purchase her. I personally don't give a toss otherwise, staggered release or not, though it is strange that WG should introduce it now, in such a way. Making the most of a bad decision, only by making another poor decision in doing so.

Alabama: 22 Benson: 21 Atago: 46 Charles Martel: 2 + 1 = 3 - Oh hell no you scrubs. You are not getting rid of this ship yet. Probably the best tier 8 cruiser, above the other 2. Mikhail Kutuzov: 33 North Carolina: 13 -3 =10 - As before. Alabama is too similar and better in the stats that mean more. Tirpitz: 20 Shōkaku (2/2/2): 28 I could go on a rant on how Martel needs a nerf. Could. Better firesetter than Atago... far more range, maneuverability.etc.

Well, I would prefer Emerald to stay at tier 5, just as a premium, so new players don't have to go through her, and get an easier time with Arethusa. Danae would be decent at tier 4 if she had been modeled correctly. HE + proper armour values and model. Like a harder hitting Kuma (with better armour, if that can be believed by the playerbase.) Instead, tiers 2-5 get shafted by the RN AP only that was used to balance out the high tiers. HP repair may have been added as an afterthought to try and compensate for those body blows, but ultimately it hasn't really worked. Caledon was going to contend for knocking Tenryu off my favourite tier 3 ship, as I could just about manage still with the borked citadel. Then the ability to do competitive damage was taken away. Well, I never got any of that from the RN CLs. Resorting to ramming things was a common tactic because the AP just didn't do damage for me. It would take far more than just a toss in HP repair for me to play those ships as they are. Well, I am strange. For liking all the bad ships apparently. T6 Mutsuki, Stock Fuso, T-22, Pre-buff Furutaka, etc. etc. - Some I just don't get along with though, but I think I could manage to outfox a FdG with the Mk.IX**. Either that, or I take up all of a T9 BBs attention through harassment. Definitely a ship I would like to see for maximum pew pew. Well, support is also flexible enough for me at doing damage. And usually even with a 'support' ship, I can outwit/outplay opponents regardless. Plus, if I am feeling lazy, then I can load up those ships and rack up a fair bit of damage from decent positioning etc. Public Test 0.6.5 Patch Notes. I call it a skin, since I can't think of a better word for it. - I would expect Gallant to be definitely along the lines of Hatsuharu in play style, rather than the spam like nature of Fubuki, which would probably lose to Gallant on account of her being quite large for the tier, easy to hit and unmaneuverable. Definitely expecting the concealment to be under 7km though. Gallant is a small little ship compared to the others, I believe the smallest at tier 6 by some way, so she should definitely use that to her advantage in gunfights to negate some of the shells thrown at her. Also good for avoiding incoming cruisers as well. Maybe she is a bit more of a hit and run and then return to dump another 8 torpedoes before getting out again quickly and in a clandestine fashion. I would definitely prefer 10km Mk.IX but that is me, liking the old Mutsuki's 10km torps which people lamented for being too slow.

Grenade. Should've Could've Would've. Didn't. I have not seen a picture of Grenade while sinking/burning at Dunkirk, so that would be interesting to see.

I recently got that book, and I have the edition for cruisers as well, but I am a bit skeptical of it's accuracy, given that Stord/Svenner are mistaken for each other etc. - Also searching for Grenade's camo opens up a few other interpretations of her camo scheme, hence my caution.

When 'not many' with CE is said, there are precisely 2. Kagero (Matsumoto Taro) & Warspite (Edward James). Well, with the changes in MM, it looks like T5 is the tier at which players emigrate into the full complexity of the game. This probably means the earlier/less capable 1920s/30s cruisers take the spot at tier 5, with the WW1 designs being confined to below, or as premiums. There are a few exceptions, but that is the trend I see. Chung King is probably just a toss to the Asian market, there, but I would expect the contemporary Penny-lope to be far more popular. Ajax certainly has the war record and fame, but a limited utility radar at tier 6 is just me thinking about historical references (Passero) and with tier 5 and above being the 'big league' so to say, exposed to all the consumables etc. Well, I did write what I think of her, but since I am not a CC, just a measly ST, I get to stay schtum on the damn boat. Well, not many people wanted a line of Flints. I personally don't believe that they were boring as some said. Close range duelers which can then disengage/hide. But people don't like being burnt out from the angry smoke cloud apparently. Still miffed that WG went the full extreme option of 'fixing' them. I guess Russian cruisers being out earlier means they take the ordinary line while people are not clamouring for consumables on their lines. Nah she doesn't. Much. Maybe I am being too nice, since I very rarely slam ships. Support is pretty useful (for me), and you can win a 1v1, or at least I can, but you have to be running/dodging/have more HP. Nurnberg may not be the best comparison since she has poor HE and needs to spam to be effective, while La G with her original reload just outclassed her. Some ships aren't meant to win 1v1s though I guess. Algerie & Martel were excellent. The AP was quite effective against cruisers, but then again I didn't stay back and spam, usually chasing down and bullying other cruisers, and when bottom tier, making myself a nuisance by dancing around dodging and diving around islands and spamming torpedoes. Yes, the later bridge is more pleasing to the eye, but the I shouldn't be complaining. I like looking at Nelson & Rodney because they are powerful and brutish, not because they are pretty. However, I am concerned at a few things on Gallant, the most at the moment being the torpedoes WG give her, and the forward firing arcs on the forward set of tubes. Being a ship closer in size to Clemson than to Farragut, having 4 guns and 8 torpedoes put on the hull means it could be cramped in game purposes and slightly inflexible. She is definitely a pretty ship though. I do like the RN shades of Green and they work quite well for me. I do note that Gallant's camouflage is actually Grenade's, or a derivative of Grenade's. Maybe Pennants, alternative bridges and camouflages would be available with the new skins feature. Well, Gallant is small, so I would expect the concealment to be more IJN style than anything else, though WG just makes something up nowadays. I will have to wait and see what WG to for the guns. I'd probably still end up gunfighting with her, but that is just me. I tend to gunfight in most ships. Hatsuharu vs Gallant might be interesting to see though. Glowworm is probably going to be a tier 6, despite how much I want to go around harassing F.d.Grosses with her. Maybe the quintuple torpedoes would just be a B-hull upgrade on a T6 interwar standard. I doubt a 5th gun Leader option as a C-hull would appear though. Different ship, different size hulls etc. - Probably better leaving it for a DL line with accompanying premium beforehand.

Well, I would expect you take a more usual path for your captains. I happen to be quite unusual in this respect, along with my limited use of flags, premium consumables and equipment. People wonder how I live with that. Not having CE is a bit of a kicker, but I usually find ways to work around it, to varying degrees of success. IJN DDs are tricky quite often. 87 ships in port, having bought the Bayern today as she is on sale. Usually I wait until sales to buy ships anyway, since I have too many and often don't get much of a chance to play ships I like. Often I have a selection of non-elites and ships I have not played often on a rota. Currently, Yorck is just about to leave that, having unlocked and bought Hipper, while Fuso is nearing elite status, and the newcomers Bayern, Ognevoi, Hipper & Yugumo have joined. Test ships also happen to be on this roll. Personally I think Bismarck should lose the hyrdo or the secondaries, or both. Maybe the top two could keep it. Missouri has radar to just make her something over Iowa, although personally I have mixed feelings over the choice of radar. The IJN DDs do keep quite constant in those regards, then again, I don't feel like everything necessarily has to be a large improvement though. Well, Regular Arethusa, Premium Chung King, and Premium Penelope. I would love that. And a throw a premium Ajax in there as well (6 obviously). Maybe HE, radar and a longer range at the expense of the smoke and HP repair. Well, I think Hood ____ __ ____, __ ___ __ _ ______ ____, ____ __ ____ _______. It would have been better suited to the Russian or Japanese cruisers, but apparently no one wants to change those HE spammers. La G is not good for going solo, but is decent for support, or at least I performed adequately with 10s. Obviously less than with the 7.5s, but still good enough for a tier 6. The thing that annoyed me more than the speed, which is fairly minor, was the 2 torpedoes per side, which felt disappointing coming after the triple tube armed ships. Well, MN CAs are average with a fairly specific consumable which is not as effective at doing things in gameplay terms, which in my eyes, is a good thing. After the mess that is the RN CLs, the MN CAs were looking good for the most part, but then WG went and made Algerie & Martel OP, La G lacklustre, and Bertin arguably better than her tier 6 counterpart when Bertin was already a strong performer. Algerie was not nerfed, and Friant simply doesn't belong at tier 3 stat. Still slogging through some proposals, but I am struggling for time. Constructing long forum posts is on a bit of a backburner atm. Eh, I like it. Though mainly for looks. She seems quite small and maneuverable. Spritely and dangerous. But then again, I always placed her at tier 6. (Really hoping that I can complete a set of 3 with KGV @ tier 8 with 14" - If RN CLs tell me anything, WG will probably do something with her in terms of stat fiddling). Interesting to note if WG will want to artificially nerf A/B into tier 5 and split the identical classes across 2 tiers. I would personally thing E/F or I is probably the tier 6 in the regular line though.

Alabama: 22 Benson: 27 Atago: 45 Charles Martel: 3 + 1 = 4 - 10s reload just makes the average cruiser ridiculously OP in competent hands. In the same league as Kutuzov & Atago. Desperately needs a nerf. Mikhail Kutuzov: 35 North Carolina: 19 -3 = 16 - As much as I like her, Alabama is just better in the areas that matter. Power creep'd. Tirpitz: 19 Shōkaku (2/2/2): 27

I hope that they use 10km Mk.IX or Mk.IX* instead. Just my preference.

Don't forget mr3awesome's line/s as well. Slightly different, probably more accounting for power creep.

8 is the logical choice pour moi.

Independence (1/1/1) : 20Independence (0/2/1) : 11 -3 = 8 - Shouldn't we be getting rid of the stupid carrier options before the actually capable Nürnberg?Independence (2/1/0) : 20 New Mexico : 21Cleveland : 22Farragut : 23Arizona : 20Shinonome : 20Mutsu : 20Ryūjō (1/2/2) : 20Ryūjō (3/1/1) : 17 Fusō : 19Aoba : 22Fubuki :17Hatsuharu : 8Graf Spee : 22Bayern : 12Nürnberg : 2Ernst Gaede : 18Warspite : 22 Leander : 18Molotov : 21Budyonny : 19Gnevny : 20La Galissonnière : 11Dunkerque : 21Anshan : 20Duca d'Aosta : 21Perth : 23 + 1 = 24 - What Leander should be.

*insert French-ness here*

I liked that thing... I said I would free XP if I had a bad game. I got nothing below 48k damage, and that was in a tier 8 game.

Fecking forum monster stirkes again. Thankfully, Trainspite uses Microsoft word, and it is very effective! Most of the time I am glad my supertester stats are not shown, but occasionally there are times that it would be useful. I doubt I can reveal the contents of those excels to you. Rest assured, I have played all the RN CLs pretty extensively, and have the experience required for my opinions. Neptune (1944 Cruiser Design Y) is a tier 10 design in terms of capability. There are definitely those that like her more than Minotaur (Minotaur Design ZA). Mainly for being a bigger ship, more brutish and requiring less finesse than Minotaur. A choice between concealment & maneuverability or firepower, AA, HP & range. If Neptune hadn't had her RoF nerfed from the 15RPM that she could have got, then she would be an ideal tier 10 candidate to complement Minotaur, with smaller versions of each at tier 9 (Q/R & Z2 respectively). So I can't rate Neptune any worse than Minotaur. It is a choice as said before. Neptune is a beast for her tier, and part of that comes from being an equivalent design in terms of power. No, but nor does spamming at range. A player with good aim and estimation will hit a Zao at range as they can a Minotaur shifting around in it's smoke. In the end, it is still spamming, and the excitement probably comes from not being safe with the Minotaur, knowing you could be ousted from the smoke and have your game ruined in an instant (or ruin an assailant DDs game). I would hardly regard that as more fun though, at least for me. I don't like living life on the edge that much. I will commit to a brawl where I will deal more than I take, and bully opposition through maneuvering. Yes, but the RN CL line does exist below tier 6. Stupidly applying high tier mechanics to low tier ships. Still means half of the line is a failure. Of course Hatsu is up against it. Leander is still a cruiser and Hatsuharu a fairly mediocre DD. But DDs can achieve against RN CLs what they can't against other cruisers. Using torpedoes is not essential if you can mitigate a lot of the damage that is thrown your way. Keep on wiggling and keeping the guns on track. DPM is shite statistic in my opinion for measuring anything, and should have no influence whatsoever. It is basically useless to know something you can never achieve, that is affected by so many factors in game. Cleveland is a tier 8. But the point was to take any tier 6 cruiser with the possible exception of Aoba, and it will deal better with a DD than Leander can. Heck, the D'Aosta and it's weak HE would have an easier time against a competent DD captain. If the Fiji goes for objectives, it is no longer a 1v1. And the Belfast can easily turn and pursue if it was a true 1v1. Yes, if Belfast wants to get turrets out, she will do less damage while doing so, but that is also a risk worth taking if RNG decides to be with you. If not, then the HE spam rains death and fires. It doesn't really matter, but if I was in a Belfast and I found myself isolated facing a Fiji at full HP, I would definitely feel confident I would win. I know it is not the only thing that there is. But it is essentially it. I refer to it as low fuse AP because I don't see it as a super AP, or improved AP, and it is definitely not SAP. I am well aware of the USN autobounce angles, having worked with piritskenyer on USN CAs and alike, and constantly said that Pepsi and NO are not as bad as people think (pre-buff). I know these exist, and I know that it works in tandem with the low fuse to prevent the AP from being shockingly bad (that is from experience). But it is still not enough for me to be satisfied with it. It doesn't work enough and relies on oblivious or stupid enemies a lot of the time if you want to get a big damage game. That is how my Neptune damage record game came about (most damage done in an RN CL). Most of a flank of enemies ignoring the Neptune that was peeking around the corner of an island until it was too late. Having known the capabilities of the ships when they had HE, the AP is still infuriating and unreliable at dealing damage. That is just from experience. Having the occasional salvo which is lucky and gets a good damage output just is not worth it the sacrifice for me. The low fuse AP has to make up the damage done by fires, HE & the regular AP broadside strikes. And it is just not up to the job, the only reason it may seem that way being the good RoF and the consumables loaded upon the RN CLs to keep them around in game for longer so they can rack up an equivalent amount of damage to other cruisers. Any other cruiser that has equivalent consumables added to it would be OP in a flash. Yet aside from Fiji & Neptune, the RN CLs are not exactly stunning. Well, I know I am opinionated. I ain't denying that. But I fail to be convinced by the argument that the RN CLs are fine as is, and are the best line introduced by WG. There is just too much wrong about them, too inflexible, too gimmicky (arcade-like in a way - not a major point, but as someone who likes his history, it is there), the abysmal lower tiers, etc. I wouldn't say they are small cruisers. Fiji is a bit squished from being an attempt to get 12x 6" on a very small hull, but the rest with the exception of the modern Minotaur are pretty average sized for their tier. They are not very lightly armoured either. Neptune & Minotaur might be, the rest are not. Even the lower tiers. WG screwed the armour stats and model for them, and made the citadels unnecessarily large. However, fixing those issues apparently takes time, as seen with Iowa/Monty. The lower calibre guns also only apply at tier 9 and 10, since only the USN can field equivalent CLs at those tiers. I don't see why HE should be denied in the first place though. I know HE+Smoke is apparently 'toxic' but why the need to completely remove it? It was not necessary, and the AP was good enough as is, being able to punish some who was not angling with ease. They hardly suited to taking away their biggest damage source. With the power creep of the game, they would need all the help they can get, though they did get it, too much in the case of Leander & Fiji. It is like taking the AP away from the RN BBs. Because the AP apparently is smaller calibre etc. and there is too much AP already flung around, so they get a buffed HE round. I know cruisers use both ammo types a bit more often, but the same principle applies. It's something to possibly be experimented with, but not right now, not while the major nations are missing their lines, CVs & AA are borked etc. and especially not with a line like the RN CLs, which carry such importance of being the first RN line. I know only WG know those stats, but I can notice trends and alike. This kind of experimentation should be saved for a duplicate line, not the first of the most anticipated nation. WG have taken a risk, and it has not exactly payed off, except in possibly making one of the most broken ships in Belfast. And by applying the high tier mechanics to low tier ships, they are making the same mistake as WoT has done. It does make sense. Take an RN CL, and strip away all it's special or more extreme gimmicks and try to balance it as a regular cruiser based around the existing ones in game with the low fuse AP. Maybe smoke can be kept, to offset the cruisers from being made to look bad by power creep (Leander is the main focus for that). But the HP repair goes, the maneuverability that compliments the smoke goes, the acceleration goes, the single fire torpedoes go, the regenerative HP repair goes. The Yamato example is a straight up buff, then nerf compared to other BBs. The RN CLs have got nothing but buff upon buff to compensate for a body blow nerf of losing HE. Not exactly. It is one pillar of my point of view. The others being that is is unnecessarily complicated for the game at this stage (excessive use of consumables and gimmicks), has had questionable results as a line as a whole (what benefit at what cost etc.) and that the RN CLs are possibly one of the least suited to lines at first for the AP only mechanic. I know the test versions they went through, though I can't speak about them in detail, if at all. But that AP had to be so far buffed that it is unreal. Nothing to back up which claim? That the RN is the most anticipated? That should just be taken as fact, since I could easily bring up far more 'RN when' threads from the history of this forums, and the other regions. Not especially. I should have said that I don't like the short fuse AP if it comes at the expense of HE & fire damage, and the flexibility that gives me. They don't need to be the best cruiser at each tier. But they should at least be half balance, and not have the OP Fiji alongside the diabolical low tiers. There is a reason I want Fiji & Leander to lose their HP repair. Where do I start on what is broken about the RN CLs... for a start the individual ships. Tiers 2 to 5 being shite. Tiers 1 & 7 being OP. Tiers 9 and 10 being so extreme in their characteristics that they are barely balanced. And then there is the broken armour models. Having 8km torpedoes instead of 10km ones. And Emerald not firing supercharged shells but having a supercharged velocity as a very specific example. I could go on, but I would just be repeating myself. There is a reason that if I get around to it, my proposed changes to the RN CL line would require it's own thread and planning beforehand. But I have enough on my plate as is. Apologies Dropsiq, while I would like to answer, I have spent enough time for now arguing. (Also applies to Sidian). I will come back to it if I get a chance between my exams, one of which is tomorrow. (Trainspite you skreb, you should fix your life out before some boat game wibbles).

Ach, that is unfortunate. It happens to me sometimes, for better or for worse. Usually I can motivate myself to rewrite it out when it happens to defy the forum monster. Other times I just don't bother and let it lie. Probably a good thing if I had managed to get into writing too much and slowly increase the levels of passive aggressive language.

2 SCs in a week. 2,000 gold. No modules. I am on the verge of calling hacks.

Don't worry. I take my time sometimes, with numerous examples. I do try to respond, because if I leave it too long, then I think it isn't worth responding anymore. Yeah, I guess old Baltimore was an example of a lot of misfits just not fitting together. I do agree that the ship should have a chance at any point in the game, large or small, so never terminally disadvantaged, though there are few ships where that is the case. Well, I am not trying to get you to think that tier 8 is the only place, I know perfectly well that LM would work at tier 7 as well, but just for flexibility, LM can work at both tiers in game. That feeling could be because the American destroyers are generally considered some of the best in the game, or at least very reliable in terms of what they do. I do try to transfer to captain up, which is how I have 1 really experienced captain with CE sitting in Kagero, but I do have a dedicated captain for every ship in the line, and I think I will leave Taro Matsumoto in Kagero, and train a new guy for the recently purchased Yugumo, which I have had unlocked for a long time. Maybe I will try out the F3s, but my impression of them from previous testing was that they did not suit my gameplay style, even if I am an aggressive little pest in game and end up in brawls a lot of the time. As for the ships themselves, I will only sell it if I really did not like it, or if it is a paper ship which did not appeal to me. Given the IJN DDs are one of the only lines in the game with no design ships, I haven't sold any of them past Isokaze. On the contrary, I like the idea of them, and I think there is the potential for an RN trait in them, it would definitely make the DDs a bit interesting. Minotaur is a bit of an exception in the RN line, in that you reload so quickly that quickly drawing up the tracks and aim for all 8 torpedoes can be a pain if the ship needs to keep the projectiles flying. It is quite situational, but it does yield results if you can hit a battleship in succession with all of them. I would probably use her a little more than Perth because of the extra range and HP in that state, or so, if the 2 ever became comparable enough. Arethusa also introduces players to a more high tier suited ship, akin to what follows her, which corresponds with the MM change. Out of the paddling pool and alikes. Fiji may be worse because close range fighting is a bit more specialised than the Shchors being able to dominate at mid and long ranges. But she is quite similar to Edinburgh as it stands, so it is probably more specific to the RN than the Fiji itself. Neptune is more of a blunt brute compared to Minotaur, a bit more of a solid ship instead of one that takes more finesse like Minotaur. If she had a faster reload, then I would definitely expect her to be tier 10 worthy. I don't understand WGs balance either. There is no clear direction. The speed boost is something to help avoid shells really in my eyes. Say the ship has tactically beached itself and needs to shift quickly to avoid that incoming BB salvo. Plus the faster speed for greater dodging etc. It's nothing too special, but it does help to an extent I guess. La G is definitely not very good when stacked up against Budyonny. She can perform results, but why take her when there is something inherently better out there. The same applies for Algerie & Yorck. I wouldn't think it would be that fun either, D'Aosta was fairly infuriating for me because of the DD like HE damage. La G is fine and gets results, but is just a bit meh. 10s reload on 6" without having excess numbers of them is a bit disheartening to play. However much I want Leander with no consumables to be the normal, she will probably never lose at least 1 of them.