byronicasian

Yea, the Pan Asian tree of 2 ships (one of which is region locked to the Chinese server).

Yes, to the extent that you have fictional flags for fictional countries. America is renamed M-Series, Japan is R-series (with fictional class names for all ships) and so on. They also have a 2nd webpage that reminds me of a certain game. http://wows.kongzhong.com/wows2.html

The article you linked has this specific section, "The original flag used between 1871 and 1919 can be shown depending on circumstances in different states of Germany. Because members of the far righthave used the imperial war flag as a symbol, its use is considered to be a "breach of the public order" in seven states, and flags will be confiscated. In the other nine states, any provocative misuse of the flag can be prosecuted as anOrdnungswidrigkeit (summary offence)." Which seems to coincide with these articles http://articles.latimes.com/1993-10-01/news/mn-41042_1_nazi-symbols (aka. start of the efforts to ban the old Imperial Flag) https://books.google.com/books?id=QZr1vsDIvlUC&pg=PA82&lpg=PA82&dq=german+imperial+flag+neo+nazis+bann&source=bl&ots=-5k5orEoE_&sig=Vh9kCBDC16JnC5cK05U5knxWOpQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjxjtfh5qfKAhXI2D4KHZSsABUQ6AEIWDAJ#v=onepage&q=german%20imperial%20flag%20neo%20nazis%20bann&f=false Even if it wasn't a "legal" thing, where WG could win any suit some overzealous prosecutor get any ideas, the bean counters probably thought it wasn't worth the trouble. http://kotaku.com/world-war-ii-battleship-game-angers-players-in-south-ko-675913077 http://news.asiaone.com/News/Latest%2BNews/Science%2Band%2BTech/Story/A1Story20130628-433187.html The Koreans got really really ticked off at the display and threatened to lobby the Korean Games Rating Board to prohibit WoWs release in Korea. So yes, the removal of the IJN flag was a business decision in that they didn't want to get off on the wrong foot for a huge PC gaming market. According to the article, WG Korea also brought up the concern way before release. Hell, even the JMSDF stows away the old ensign during visits to Korean ports.

I must be spending to much time on the EU forums, but I could've sworn that I've read the "THESE SHIPS ARE DON"T GIVE PREMIUM BENEFITS" posts on the NA forums also...

So what you're saying is that that one guy who copied pasted those pre-recorded audio files, and that one 2D artist who revamped the April Fools day skins could've been used better? Well I mean, that would surely speed up the appearance of the Royal Navy by about 20 minutes... This was something that was spearheaded by the Asia branch. If it was region locked like the old GuP ones, you probably wouldn't even know they even spent time on it lol. Just making the content accessible to fans outside of SEA seems to make people ridiculously salty.

The same wiki you posted attributes the flooding and destruction of Turbine Room 1 and Boiler-room 2 to the torpedoes The wiki that YOU linked then goes on to say " After passing the gun batteries, the crew of Blücher, including the personnel manning the guns, were tasked with fighting the fire. By that time she had taken on a list of 18 degrees, although this was not initially problematic. The fire eventually reached one of the ship's 10.5 cm ammunition magazines between turbine room 1 and turbine room 2/3, which exploded violently. The blast ruptured several bulkheads in the engine rooms and ignited the ship's fuel stores.[25] The battered ship slowly began to capsize and the order to abandon ship was given.[32]Blücher rolled over and sank at 07:30, with significant casualties" You would do well to you know, read the wiki he linked..... because it hardly deflates the "mission killed/crippled by shellfire from 11 inch coastal guns from the 19th Century and intermediate 5.9 in shore batteries" . And I'm begging you, stop ending EVERY POST with a salute emote....pls..

The maps were purposely made small so games can finish within 20 minutes...

The aforementioned poster already retracted those statements.

In port, all ships are upscaled to similar sizes for viewing purposes. In match? Unless you're looking directly top down, its probably perspective.

The Japanese had several ongoing radar/magnetron projects in the 30s (with your typical IJA/IJN rivalries hindering development) and coupled with Japan's comparatively weaker industrial base, means those projects never managed to get anything into practical use until the war was well under way. http://dreadnoughtproject.org/friends/dickson/Japanese%20Radar%20Short%20Survey.pdf So again, the first surface search radar sets the Japanese mounted in any significant number on their capital ships was the Type 22 and that was as late as 1942. These had some use in gunnery as they could be used to range targets, but training data still had to be fed to the Shakgekiban via optical directors. http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-086.htm Radars comparable to the Mark 8 Mod 2 that could be and was integrated into the Mk 38 GFCS wouldn't even be introduced to the IJN until 1944. http://www.combinedfleet.com/radar.htm In comparison the USN already had experimental search sets like the XAF installed 1938 (on the NY), and production sets like the CXAM on some of the other standard BBs by 40/41. And had proper fire control radar onboard their newest capital ships by 42. http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_Radar_WWII.htm

https://books.google.com/books?id=h5m9AwAAQBAJ&pg=PA142&lpg=PA142&dq=admiralty+fire+control+table+radar+integration&source=bl&ots=9LwZVj5Kmt&sig=LHlfudQHgFcyjj_z2HBJD-BsfuQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwja49mYoJbKAhWE1RQKHSy0ANAQ6AEISjAK#v=onepage&q=admiralty%20fire%20control%20table%20radar%20integration&f=false Wait what...the Royal Navy already had search sets on their cruisers in the 40s, and working fire control radar by 42. The Japanese most definitely did not possess proper radar integrated fire control "since the beginning". None of their search radars were even operational/mounted until 1942. The Americans already had integrated their radar into their FCS platforms proper by Guadalcanal (Sodak and Washington). The Tizard mission helped quite a bit bring the USN up to speed.

IIRC, the surviving Kongos had a Type 22 search set installed towards the end of 1942. But in terms of Fire Control integration? The IJN was far behind the USN and RN by then, so yea they replaced the older WW1 optics with more modern optics (like the Brits, and virtually every other navy, because hey, the no one in their right mind would keep old stuff around) and a "meh" radar that could be used for ranging. The Kongos interwar refit didn't replace the Vickers pattern guns.......they were just modified to have higher elevation http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNJAP_14-45_t41.htm While I may not be an RN fanboy, you are characterizing their ships by quite a bit.

Smoke doesn't render when within 4km (i.e. when you're in another DDs smoke). However, the most ships should've been auto spotted by 2.5km (aka absolute vis distance).

IIRC, its "VonPletz". Although to be fair, his written English is a bit of a pain for me to read (syntax annoys me way more than it should, not to mention that salute emote he does at the end of every post).

WG still hasn't gotten around fixing the top hull to match the Prinz Eugen (Atlantic Bow, Enclosed Bridge etc.) Is probably what he meant?

I would imagine they would implement more Northern Euro/Atlantic maps once the RN and KM BB lines get released. Same reason why most of the starting maps were based off of the Pacific (w. exception to the superweird Arctic ones) theater due to the IJN/USN being the first fleshed out trees.

Given the precedent of WG only using optimistic trial speeds on 1) paper ships 2) under-performing ships. 3) Russian DDs (well jk, the Tashkent ran trials at a heavier load than most Euro navies anyways). I somehow doubt we'll see the Fantastiques at 45 kts given that only LeTerrible made 45 knots during part of the trials when we have other fast ships like Shimakaze, Iowa (and presumably Tashkent since in game she makes 42 kts vs her trial speeds of 43.5) given "operational speeds" (i.e. Shimakaze, instead of 41 knot trial speed at powerplant overload and 1/3rd displacement, she is given the 39 kt speed of 2/3 displacement @ normal engine power; & Iowa making 30.7 knots operational for Iowa vs projected 33-35 at lighter loads w. powerplant overload). Borrowed the above scan from Redbear who got it from French Destroyers: Torpilleurs d'Escadre & Contre-Torpilleurs 1922-1956 by John Jordan & Jean Moulin. http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/31187-kantai-collection-discussion-thread-kai/page__st__10200__pid__1274525#entry1274525 Hell, they could even pull a Fubuki (where she made 38 kts unstable, so after refits and ballast, only made 35kts), and give her post-refit speed outright (after the Fantastiques got a boatload of ASW and AA equipment tacked on by the Americans) slowing her to 37ish knots.

As mentioned on the Navweaps site, a more modern HE shell was developed for said gun for use as coastal arty (shell was longer, more charge,thus had better flight qualities). As the Entwurf I/10 aka. Yorck never made it into "production", no new AP shell was developed and WG was too lazy to fudge some numbers for a theoretical updated AP shell that would've been made for said gun should this design had been actually chosen for IRL use.

Sure worked for the Blucher didn't it, all that "spaced" armor, and compartmentalization sure saved it from those state of the art 19th century coastal guns... /s

The Yorck is just a made up name for one of the prelim-Dland designs (Entwurf I/10 or something). Apart from the WW1 vintage 21cm guns, it has no relation to any real SMS ships. Cemented/Face hardened armor is by no measure unique/exclusive to the Germans by WW2. German plate was by no means any stronger than contemporary USN and RN armor. Archive photos courtesy of Horizonwalker here (http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/56167-boosting-german-line-arcade-qualities/page__pid__1377353#entry1377353) Reposted here for those w/o NA forums accounts.

I eagerly await VonPletz's unbiased, coherent, and calm response....../s Also topkek about KM cruisers having" superior protection". Sure took a lot of modern 28cm rounds to mission kill and sink the Blucher of the Adm Hipper class. And by a lot , I mean 2, and by modern I mean from the 1891. The HMS Exeter , took 7 hits from far modern 28cm guns in its engagement with the Graf Spee.

Ah yes, the Des Moines with the rainbow arcs and improperly implemented Superheavy 8" rounds because of the capped ranges. Please tell me more oh wise VonPletz.

Problem with the stuff it at T7 solution is that you already have people screaming that its a post war ship stuffed into T8. Also, you probably can't sell it as expensively.

Prem rules I can accept one offs because of money and WGs reluctance to nerf after the Type 59 fiasco. As shown with the blanket Kiev and RU DD HE nerf in 5.2, the VMF line is hardly immune from the hammer.

Or you know, since it's going to be in tree, will have AAA nerfed like the rest of the normal in tree ships as they are subject to those rules (see Gnevny 4km torps vs Gremy 8km, Gnevny's normal stealth debuff while firing guns vs Gremy's unchanged, and ahistorical AAA fits for nearly all ships). We'll likely see a lot of light-medium AAA outright replaced with shittier versions (Fuso's 25mm downgraded to 13mm) or a substantially reduced number (Iowas quad bofors into dual bofor mounts).