Unintentional_submarine

Unlikely to happen, though it would be quite fitting. In the Battle of the Denmark Strait she fired HE exclusively and arguably caused a fair bit of damage with it. So if any German cruiser should have better HE, she would probably be the best fit.

There is also a screenshot floating around somewhere around here of a KA with a full broadside to a target. And the infamous Jingles video showcased that the Kaiser in the line can do it as well. As it should.

Take at look at this then... I have set the start time for the incident. A bloody Cleveland incapacitates a turret with HE to the front (most likely hit the top of the turret or something like that). That's honestly pitiful. And those straddles my dear... it's like watching the Flak Cannon from Unreal Tournament. Yup this this is off my interest list.

There has been talk about her in a few threads so far, but as noted, since she is so very clearly unfinished there isn't much to discuss. Pretty much everyone who has chimed in are glad she is coming, though her arrival was hardly in doubt before either. So let's just say the talks are on hold until something happens. Like someone meets her in battle or something.

That much was obvious from the amount of XP the ship had. Interestingly iChase came to the same conclusions, pretty much to a point, that Flamu did.

That's not how you compare ships. He can do well in any ship. That doesn't mean all ships are good. I managed a 98k battle in Furutaka way back when she truly was bad... But that most certainly didn't mean I thought she was a good ship, or that she was at that time (she is now). You play the ship in multiple battles and compare it to your experience in other ships of similar tier and class. Flamu did well in this battle, he generally does well. He is somewhat better than me, and yet a bit more than 100k is nothing special in a Fuso or New Mexico for me. My Fuso sits at 80k average and Flamu's at nearly 83k. So if this was a particularly good game, then it was pretty weak.

Added emphasis. No, Fusos will not get overmatched just as easily as they have bow armour of 102mm covering the approaches to the citadel. Not even the lolpen machine Yamato can overmatch that, in fact nowhere near overmatch it (as her overmatch limit is 33mm). Naturally that armour isn't perfect, but lolpenning Fuso from the bow is a tricky prospect and frontal citadels are rare as hell. They can happen, but personally I haven't done so yet and as you can see I have played Tirpitz a lot and faced many a Fuso with her.

What makes you say that? Can you point me to any statements from devs that says that? As I'm sure you are aware, I have been active here since Beta, and given the changes made to the game since then any comments in Beta can at best be considered right for that time. And yet I can't remember any developer or even CM comments to specify this subject from those days. You say it with such certainty that I'm sure you can dig up this commonly known difference. I'm sure you are aware that each ship has individual XP modifiers, as evidenced by a number of patches a while ago where ships got + or - to XP and credit gains. Thus even if you were to take two ships and test them against each other it is impossible to see if they do in fact get different XP based on ship or class. My personal experience says that the cap XP is at most marginally different. I have had three cap games in battleships that looked a lot like three cap games in destroyers (for both DD and BB: relatively low damage but good income of similar XP values).

Since there were a few comments regarding Orion at T4, I decided to go without a massive multiquote. Having looked things over a bit, I must admit that with the German 12 inch gun having considerably heavier shells (though from gamemodels3d they have a low krupp value) and much faster reload, at a mildly slower MV than the 12"/50 on the British echelon ships, and Wyoming of course has 12 guns with good fields of fire, it might not be enough for Colossus to stand at T4 without some favourable tweaks. However I disagree that Orion can stand at T4 without artificial nerfs either. While the shells might be lighter than those on Myogi (contemporary design) there are ten guns with excellent arcs compared to six with a poor turret split (not to mention the other weaknesses of Myogi). So it really comes down to a preference. And there I say the echlon design deserves the spot, because it was not some outlier design. The British invented it as far as I know, most certainly were the first to introduce it and used it more more than a few ships (9 in total). Just because the ships were historically seen a less than successes, doesn't invalidate their historical position. I mean we have the Kirov, Königsberg and St. Louis classes which were certainly among the more unkindly considered classes. But this is heavy speculation we have entered. There haven't even been anything firm said aside from Lesta not yet beginning to design Hood a month or so ago, which says extremely little about the battleship line (since we can only guess if Hood will or won't be part of the initial line).

Indeed it is not WoT. There is nothing to indicate that tanking will be different between the classes. Especially not when it is presented the way it is.

All right, seems we are more in agreement than not, though I feel the adjust is more needed than you do. The point about Ranked was not that DDs dominated because they got more XP, just that it was obvious in Ranked that they got more. Naturally it helped propel them along that it was generally speaking a DD that got a the free pass on a loss. The reason for the many DDs in general is that Ranked is incredibly suited to them. And in this season with T7 BBs were unable to tank each other (overmatch mechanic at work), while cruisers were probably the poorest selection for in-tier competition. But we got some new info regarding the tanking: My my... this will certainly benefit brawling DDs a lot due to the swarm of torpedoes they often send at each other, and the plethora of shells outsiders send at them. Long range nuisance DDs might not benefit as much since they can very well end up avoiding more than 700m. Still they should get a lot. Battleships should benefit greatly. They shoot at each other a lot, and most salvos end up doing only a few percent of the potential damage. Thankfully long range snipers should not benefit that much. Even slightly off and a good portion of shells will land outside the circle. But in return they should provide a lot of tanking XP since they fire often and live for a long time. That feels sort of right. Just like a broadsider/line sailor provides us with plenty XP when we eat them up. Still, if the circle is indeed a circle and not a line of distance from the model, then DDs will probably benefit a great deal from this, since they take up a much smaller percentage of the real estate in the circle (just to give a pointer, Yamato is just shy of 1 game km, potentially covering more than half the circle lengthwise). They also don't touch upon what is not counted. Say I get hit for an overpenetration. Does the remaining damage count for tanking? Does none of it? Or maybe all? Personally I think, based on the way they just add the various sources in the answer, that all potential incoming enemy damage counts, regardless of it damaging you. Seems the least complicated, while still rather fair.

You can with some fairness compare it to the French lone standing 'u'. As in how they pronounce Mulhouse, couture (as in haut couture) or more closely chute. Phonetically is represented by [y], showing it's connection to 'y', it's just the English and their near French obsession with changing letters to a different sound.

It is wider than the H42 proposal (comparing it to FdG it is more than 3m wider). Probably in order to take the triples' barbettes.

Colossus at T3? Are you sure you don't mean Collingwood (part of St. Vincent class)? While it can technically work it sort of washes away the entire wing-turret generation for an en-echelon setup which is more 'modern'. Hence I see Bellerophon and St. Vincent as the prime T3 candidates. Dreadnought herself is of course also a possibility I just think WG has something else in store for her... *coughweakpuncough* Orion and the Iron Duke classes were to a great extent the same ships. Personally I don't feel there is enough difference or progress so to speak between them (the main advances were better placed main mast, heavier and better protected secondaries and somewhat longer torpedo belt), while you can see a clear progress of technology or design in the other three trees, hence why I put the echelon ships at T4, as a step up from the wing-turret T3 and a step down from the centerline T5, which in turn is a step down from the more fully developed QEs at T6. But I certainly agree on the refit scenario. The T3 will not see much other than a bit of WWI upgrades, and a few perhaps anachronistic AA guns, much like the other T3s.

And that's why it annoys me. This setup for the ship is a mish-mash. They found triple turret plan and crammed them into a hull not made for them. So they expanded the dimensions, but didn't take into account that the new turrets woul take up more space in turns by virtue of being wider. They know extremely well that in T10 you angle or you die in a fight. So to make a ship considerably less capable at that than her counterparts is just a stupid thing that will frustrate the players to no end. And it isn't something that can be fixed or changed easily (unlike Admiral Hipper and North Carolina recently), like say changing the capabilities of the guns or the turning circle or a long list of other balance parameters. Which makes it a terrible place to introduce a 'flavour' difference. Either they failed spectacularly in their planning of the ship, or they deliberately made it like this. I don't know which is worse, because in the end it is an immovable object so to speak. We are stuck with these terrible arcs.

I understand their decision, given that the tanks and planes have to be able to work in the same environment, thus ships have to as well. Even a destroyer might be too much bombardment capability. Imagine a Fletcher going full force on a platoon of tanks... It won't be pretty for those tanks. That said, PT boats and river monitors aren't exactly what I think of in naval battles. But then again, it is clear they are not thinking of naval battles, but rather just companion forces for land and air forces.

I'm pretty sure WG knows that a lot of people might do this, so I'm quite confident that she will arrive in the store before or at the same time as the BB line arrives. It's just marketing logic. But I'm applying logic to a group that has not exactly been great as of late (WG marketing, remember the personal offers recently and how some got extremely great free stuff and codes while others got nothing, that was apparently the marketing department's decision).

I didn't mean to imply you made up a situation. It was the general thought. And I agree, the Italian refits were different in their goals and limitations, and that German planners would probably not have followed a similar path.

Hence the issue with 'omg our CV is so bad' while the enemy team has a pro. There are only great CV players and fairly bad CV players left. All the ok to good players have left.

It's this little guy isn't it? Spoiler

I did a glorious 18700 damage that game... But I was helped on top of my 'expert' aiming with your team's Yamato's long range lolpens (that guy sat at 23km the entire game, letting your guys take all the damage; it wasn't right that he did so well), and my own ship's refusal to adhere to basic premises of dispersing to the center and not the edge. I have to train to get back in shape. But thanks for the sympathy, I certainly needed something for that disaster.

There is little point to thinking up political situations to fit the ships. Each ship is in itself a separate story. They are not interconnected aside from line progress, they are their own. So upgrades etc. are taken from a 'if this had had lived on'. Otherwise the Japanese would certainly have had to scrap the Myogi(s). And we can be pretty sure that the British T4 and T5, which were not saved from the scrapyard after WWI are also going to get upgrades. In case you wonder, no I don't know which ships those will be, just that they will be ships that didn't see service beyond the early 20s. T4 will most likely be a choice between Neptune and Colossus and T5 one between Orion, KGV (unlikely due to the name conflict) and Iron Duke. So how would those British ships have looked in a world where naval air power was realised in the 20s and they have seen service to the 40s? That's the question Lesta will deliver their answer to. And have so far with the Germans. I agree that it is slightly annoying that the stock hulls aren't the actual WWI hulls. I mean Kongo and Fuso most certainly are. And Myogi clearly follows the early design she is supposed to be in stock. Wyoming does appear to be early 20s, same with New York and New Mexico. But overall, aside from some small differences, they look like their fresh from shipyard real life counterparts.

Those pictures down't show much since we see the turrets at ease. Since they are rearwards balanced compared to the previous duals (notice the overhang to the rear of the turrets and that the face plateis behind the barbette edge), their movement isn't centrally located. This shows that the rear turret (in this case it's Dora or D on German ships, only the British use XY for the rear turrets, meanwhile the USN used numbered turrets) is for some inexplicable reason a fair distance from the actual hangar, while the super firing turret overhand the secondary nicely but the superstructure is in the way.

Yup. And it even helps with the Khabarovsk, as that 'ch' in 'loch' is quite close to the 'Kh' in Khabarovsk.