fumtu

Don't forget that Furious 457mm shells have weight of 1.5t. For example T9 Lion 406mm shells have weight of 1t and 419mm shells - 1.1t. If we translate this in WG damage numbers this mean 12.6k for 406mm and 13k for 419mm AP shells and 6.9k for 406mm and 7.2k for 419mm for HE shells. So Furious shells should probably get somewhere between 13k and 14k of AP damage and 7.5k of HE damage. Considering that at T4 majority cruisers have around 24-25k HP one shell in citadel, which is not hard to hit especially if those guns would be precise, would mean half of the cruiser health. So if you put Furious at T4 and make those guns accurate she would be quick death to low tier cruisers and probably everything else but if you make them less accurate it would be frustrating ships because you have only two guns so even less chance to hit something from stray shell. I don't see how this thing could be introduced into the game to either be OP (or you can call if 'fun') or useless. Its armour and armament prevent her to be good at mid tier but also make it either bad or OP at lower tiers.

CCs are struggling mostly because of gun dispersion and gun build is probably not the best one. But torpedo build was quite good. Don't be misleaded by looking at paper stats, Neustra is good ship with good concealment and zombi heal. Sure it is not strong in direct battle with other DDs like Kita or Jutland but thanks to heal you can outlive them, trade, heal, trade ... Even with nerf, with 20% heal flag you can get 36% of your HP back per consumable, theoretically at least. That is between 7k - 8k HP per heal per consumable which, for DD, is massive. She is at least different than other T9 DDs and definitely different than other Soviet DDs.

It was already announced that WG will test a Le Terrible with some improvements

She only had 5 x 1 5.5inch guns per side and one centerpiece 5.5 inch which could shoot on both sides. That means 6 secondary guns per side. If you want to have any AA that would mean just 5 x 1 5.5inch and 2 x 1 4inch secondary guns per side. It doesn't sound like some secondary monster. WG could go with some fictional upgrades but then they could change main guns to and in the end we could get something that actually isn't HMS Furious at all.

You can forget on these and WG will not implement underwater torpedo tubes. Furious is a huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge ship. It is larger then KGV class battleship. With just 76mm main belt it wold be HP pinata for other ships. With just two guns this ships will be horrible to play even bellow T5 not to mention at T6. And if you add probably horrible turning radius, concealment and almost non existent AA there is no way that this ship could be enjoyable to play. Courageous could work at T4, T5 maybe with some fictional upgrades but Furious simple not.

It is replaced by fighter consumable. While overall FuryTaco looks stronger, Exeter has two advantages, better concealment and, more important, heal. And it is more maneuverable and seems that it has standard RN cruiser acceleration. And Exeter citadel is way smaller that FuryTaco ones. Watching Flamu playing it it performed quite good and heal gave him edge in number of occasion. On the other hand seems like Notser is hating her.

And so what? All premium T9 and T10 ships are available for some of the game currency that could be earned just by playing, either FXP, Steel of Coal. So what if WG want to sell them for real money. Alaska is already announced to cost a 1mil of FXP. We also know prices of Neustra, Azuma and Yoshino. So what if somebody is ready to pay real money for them. If they want to do that and they can afford themselves then then why not let them to do that. It is not like they are taking money from your pocket. And it s not like you won't be able to get them either. I don't see any problem with that.

52, 51 in random games and 1 in ranked with Kitakaze (in defeat). Out of those 51 in randoms I think that between one third and one quarter of them are with Kami.

One of the ealry images from World of the Warships which is showing a Iowa Prototype If you just change 406mm turrets with those with 457mm turrets you'll get a Georgia model.

Iowa predecessor had very similar hull as South Dakota class but this was later changes in the final product. What I want to say is that Georgia was mostly based on Iowa studies and that is were majority of her stats come, her relation to Iowa class. That's way is her speed 33kn, same as Iowa.

All three USN classes, know as fast battleships, had same secondaries, 5x2 5inch on each side and all of them are in the same disposition, two in first row and three in the second. But there are some differences. First NC. If you look her secondaries, two of them are on the main deck level while three in the second row are elevated. They are also spaced with almost equal distance between them. South Dakota has all five turrets elevated from the deck, and they were quite cramped as ship and its superstructure is shorter. Also notice that first two turrets are elevated from the main deck. Now look as Missouri. You can see that first two turret are elevated on their platforms which were positioned on the main deck, not on the same deck. Also there is noticeable distance between thee turrets on the right and two turrets on the left. Also one more detail worth noticing is that boat on the deck between two turrets in the first row Now compare all these three ships with Georgia Sorry image is not the best but you can see that two turrets in first row are positioned on the platforms on main deck and that there is a distance between three front turrets and two back turrets. And there is a boat between two turrets on platforms. This is clearly showing that Georgia secondaries match those on Iowa class. Also Georgia superstructure looks like that of SoDok because Iowa class originally had almost same superstructure which you can see in the images I posted in earlier post. So Georgia is relative to Iowa class and that is where Georgia speed of 33kn came from. It is the same as Missouri and Iowa.

It is not. SoDak hull has only one stack, Georgia has two, just like Iowa class. Position of the secondary guns also match Iowa class not SoDak class. Georgia is more related to Iowa class then any other class.

Iowa class is what USN called "Fast Battleship". It is designated as Battleship. By the time Iowa class was build, battlecruisers were already an old concept as now battleships could do their job.

Battlecruiser? It is a battleship not a battlecruiser.

If WG make her secondaries same to those of Massa then it could be interesting but if it it just Iowa class with 3x2 457mm then she doesn't look appealing at all.

It is very similar to Iowa class with her original (wartime) bridge. It is quite different from NC class. Only bow is different but still not the same as NC class.

Izmail or also know as Borodino class was also laid down. Izmail was even more completed then Sovetsky Soyuz when all four ships of the class were scrapped.

Name of the proposed mod is wrong tho. If it just a "casual" battles between the clans/teams then you can't call it the Competitive as there is no actual competition. Clan/Team battles would be describe your idea way better.

Exactly what @mlgomez said. It would be already difficult to get team of 7 players and right time of the day, even tho mode would be available all day I guess at the same moment there wouldn't be that many teams, and right tier, few teams dispersed between ten tiers, that queue time would be really long. With current population on all four servers, that mode could succeed only if it will unified all off them, something similar with what WG wan't to do with CBs. In all other cases I think it would be way better for WG to spend time and resource to fix training rooms than waste time for lidl CB mode.

What would be a point? Either: move GC at T6 and balance it for that tier or nerf it at T5 leave GC as it is now But there is no point of leaving GC as it is and releasing a new GC at T6 with different name at the same time.

I personally like how ship is and if she is cheaper I would definitely buy her. If she came in the summer sale I would buy her for sure. I don't mind her not having 10km radar or SSH AP, but I think that with one more consumable she could be nice, like hydro on separate slot or maybe MBRB as it would be very useful to utilize her good concealment without giving her SSH AP. But that is just my opinion. What on the other hand I don't like is the way WG released her. She was last tested in October last year and we didn't see her until she appeared in the shop. Seems like she wasn't tested since last October and lot of things change since then. CE skill get nerfed but more importantly the CV rework. I would prefer if she was given to CCs one more time before release just to see how she behave in the new meta and to see do she needs some buffs or nerfs before release.

Flamu's commentary on Wichita

Well better then Emerald is not something to brag about.

Nuestra dispersion is basically the same as Grozovi, 110m on 12.8km compared to 107m on 12.3km. It is just one less turret and the placement of the guns. i don't understand why people expected that Execter will be bad without smoke. Great concealment, great maneuverability, small citadel and heal. Smoke and great RoF make her OP, now I think she is quite good for T5. Yes she could suffer in T7 matches but not more than majority of other T5 cruisers. At her own tier she looks good.

Just to know majority of the videos on the YT are showing initial version, very few videos are there about last version. I suggest you to wait for the first reviews of this version before you decide would you buy her or not. I think this is a first video with current ship in current meta, even tho SeaRaptor is not speaking much about Wichita specifically.