Unintentional_submarine

Well, blatant would be nerfing all DDs with 20% less HP or something like that. Or making BB superstructures immune to 130mm HE.

This is going on repeat... Hard to imagine anything else.

I'm sort of hoping it's a joke.

Leningrad is pretty huge too, but has more superstructure and is quite hard to hit compared to other DDs due to her low freeboard. This would be taking that to the next level. But yeah, with that absurd length to width ratio she is going to have issues turning. I can't see her turning circle being less than 700m.

And break in half with a wavelength of 50m.

For all the people like me who couldn't see anything useful in the first link. Look at the silly low freeboard and no superstructure. That thing will be a major pain to hit.

Yup. Some things are simply not going to fit into the game, and it should be obvious. If every interaction was "let's wait and see first" then we would still be going on very basic wheels because we hadn't yet tried the triangular version to the end. By the way, that PTS with the manual drop skill, I remember it having the activation range as the line where the torps started. So you could functionally get 4/4 IJN torps on a target even with DF up. That was another thing that really shouldn't have made it to the test. It was stupid and it was stupid in concept.

100 New Years camos... yeah. Like I will ever use more than a handful in low tier games.

How does one get a bigger version of it? I can only see a very small one.

The skill isn't intended for BBs. It is meant for DDs so they can kill each other faster, and leave the actually important class in peace. It is a sly way of nerfing a class and buffing another, by making the nerfed class fight itself even harder.

Actually they do look 130mm. They are just not the 130mm of the Gnevny class. They are in fact similar to those on the Krasny Krym. That fits with the fact that it has 5 guns and Gnevny only has 4 (one tier up). Gnevny has much more powerful guns. The main difference lies with the KK gunhouses having a sloped surface towards the rear, that is wider at the bottom than the top. The Gnevny gunhouses are entirely flat and it's faceplate is sloped back at a greater angle.

I had to look this thing up! FAAAAAAAK! "We wants it preci... *ahem* by the Force."

The video is about the entire year so to speak. So it entails any reworks after the UI as well. Admittedly the CV population is small, but it is smaller than intended, probably because of the state the class is in. The potential population is much larger, and the population that has an interest in carriers (as being something interesting to fight) is probably quite big. Let's not forget that every class should be interesting to play, but also interesting to play against. It is the latter bit I'm thinking of could benefit from more varied weaponry. 1000lb AP would probably overpen more than a few ships, so it could balance itself out. The present 1000lb HE bombs are devastating to destroyers (I shudder every time I think of the Saipan DB group playing in a DD), but with AP it could be considerably less. At least that's how I envision that. Since it is just speculation on top of speculation, I wouldn't take too much stock in it. And yes, I imagine you could pick the loadout 'on the fly' onboard the CV. It would be flexible, yes, but it would also force the CV player to decide well ahead of his attack what to pick. Once chosen, he would be stuck. Now, just adding AP bombs would naturally make CVs more powerful so I imagine it would come with a reduction to the HE bombs, so that you can't just pick the HE bombs and 'be safe' in case you have to bomb something fragile, while still being good against heavier ships. Some price would be paid.

This is correct. Destroyers were 'torpedo boat destroyers', but obviously that was a bit of a mouthful so it was quickly shortened. It should be noted that several of the destroyers ingame are in fact torpedo boats. But it is simply a matter of terminology.

The French were more into big destroyers, so I would assume BBs and DDs. But honestly I would prefer leaving the BBs out for now and having the cruisers.

Only the battleships.

Well, those rockets didn't exactly have a lot of range, so I would imagine a no to that.

They have mentioned something to that extent a while back. So that seems the most likely candidate to me. Alternatively I could imagine bombardment rocket racks... but I fail to see what they would add to the gameplay.

Yesterday, in a perfectly even battle (4 of each class on both sides, no CVs) one of our BBs exclaimed "OMG what's up with the massive number of DDs?" Apparently a perfectly even battle is massive numbers for DDs, but not for BBs. I think the poor fellow has been 'brought up' during the inflated BB numbers period, and so is used to having BBs being the most numerous class. Obviously he didn't complain about cruiser numbers as they are food. Now, the guy's reaction was a surprise to me, but thinking about it, it made sense to him. Four destroyers per side in a battle has to him, been a rather unheard number. So the natural reaction is one of surprise. I think his reaction to an even battle says a lot about the current state of affairs.

I wasn't worried about Akizuki's extra pen, for her it is about being able to pen BB superstructures and DD hulls. The interesting cases are the Soviet CLs, like say Chappy and Shchors, heck even the Donkey can use it, now that the fire reduction is more manageable. I remember well how hard Mogami 155 hurts T6-7 BBs with their total vulnerability to 155mm HE. Now that will be applied to those ships too, which so far have been only able to hurt the superstructure of the battleships of their tiers. Of a bonus interest are the Ognevoi and Kiev. They too will retain a workable fire chance with the penetration to hurt battleships along the entire hull. The USN DDs are probably still not worth it due to their lower fire chance.

Inertia Fuse appears to have become a must-have for Akizuki. Then her HE will punch well, and there will still be some fire chance left over, which with her great rate of fire will probably work out nice enough. I wonder about other classes though. With that sort of reduction, a lot of the border cases might have some value. Survivability Expert: Uncertain about this one as yet. Can be a nerf to DDs, but can also be buff. Will wait and see how it pans out. CV skill is still meh. It is just the wrong style of skill. Fighters will still just strafe the bombers down. It is pointless. The worst bit is that newbies will see the 75% more HP and think this is great. It is going to be a massive noob-trap I'm afraid. Adrenaline Rush: Meh still. It is just not a very impressive thing. It might work for torp-focused play now, but still... Fire Prevention: Doesn't change that the skill's second part is just too good, especially combined with the reduction in fires overall (if Inertia Fuse becomes worth it for more than a couple of ships). It doesn't mean everyone will take it, but it is a skill that will always be very useful for battleships. RPF still there is... not something I'm very fond of. Overall I'm not terribly impressed

Somehow I managed it... and then stage 5 was easy-peasy. The amusing part is that the very next battle I 'did it' again. Incoming 9 months of <10k flooding damage.

I 'like' that the other thread was canned, just as information was being collected about this, in an effort to figure out what exactly is going on.

Yeah, it probably looks like my efforts at modding Paradox games... More and more conditions and triggers, until I don't even know what I have done, so I have to restore original parameters and restart every time something goes wrong. Maybe that is indeed what they should do. Clean it up.