Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Battleship'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Forum
    • English Speaking Forum
    • Deutschsprachige Community
    • Polska Społeczność
    • Česká a slovenská komunita
    • Communauté francophone
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Topluluk
    • Comunità Italiana
  • Mod Section
    • Rules, Announcements and General Discussion (English)
    • Modding Tutorials, Guides and Tools (English)
    • Interface Mods
    • Visual Mods
    • Sound Mods
    • Modpacks
    • Other Mods and Programs
    • Outdated Mods
    • Archive
  • Historical Section


  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Found 197 results

  1. What premium BB to buy with doubloons

    I have about 15000 doubloons to spend for a new premium BB. I already have the Tirpitz, that I enjoy the most of my battleships. I grinded the Japanese line up to tier 7 (Nagato), but I found the ship extremly boring. (I also grinded American/French line till tier 5 and German till tier 6) I like the action oriented close range style of the Tirpitz, when I ocassionaly can finish off targets with torps. My question comes down to which of the following ship shall I buy? My goal is not being competitve, but to have fun. 1. Scharnhost PRO: Similar close range style with torps. CON: Does it have an added fun value after having Tirpitz? 2. Gascogne PRO: Might be different that the Tirpitz, but still fun CON Lot of negative reiews about it: 3. Alabama PRO: Best reviews for Tier8 BB CON: I don't know if I would have nearly as much fun as in the Tirpitz 4. Anything else. Your opinions would be appreciated.
  2. HMS Hood play advice

    I was kindly given the HMS Hood as a gift a while back and whilst I do love having her I have never been able to really play the ship to its full potential, certainly compared to other battleships I have, so any advice or suggestions would be welcome. I realise that with the faster arming time her AP is great for dealing damage to cruisers, but much less likely to citadel battleships, so I have been going for the battlecrusier role in her, trying to use the speed to keep up with cruisers pushing flanks (when that happens) but I struggle with her poor accuracy. The Hood is extremely vulnerable to HE just like all British battleships but with so few guns the accuracy really is a massive draw back when compared to other battleships although all battleship players are at the mercy of RNG, meaning that I will probably loose a lot of health before I can finally finish off the cruisers I'm usually hunting especially if friendly cruisers have fallen victim to accurate BB fire. The one thing I do like about the Hood is her AA apparently a lot of CV players don't realise she has the AA boost so there is a certain satisfaction of taking out their first strike and only having to dodge the couple of torpedos that make it into the water. Can anyone who has the Hood suggest alternative ways to play her or is her wildly inaccurate guns her thing like they are with the Gneisnaeu and you just have to accept it?
  3. Hi guys In this topic i would like to talk about secondaries survivability overall and especially about these on the massechusetts. Those of you who has massa know about she's gimming - She has worse accuracy of main guns that hers competition but instead has improved accuracy on secondary guns and faster reloading health - all intended to made her a good brawler. Ofcouse to made it happen you have to have at least captain with 18 skill points and invest them in advanced firing training, manual fire control and inertia fuse for HE. Ofcourse take into consideration that experienced captain on this ship is.. quite not enough to be successful in average game. You also need to get close enough to the enemy to use them and it is not as easy as it may seems because of tier VIII matchmaking which in ~68% samples is put up to games with tier IX and X - where games are played on larger maps with streched ranges.. So to the point -> Recently in my games i have a large numbers od destroyed secondaries even - when like in this case - i am almost out of battle My secondaries are dying no matter what i will do and this is not a big amount of damage and not done by a large caliber HE As you see those are baltimore HE shells - not high caliber from battleships ofcourse i have whatever i can to increase survivability -> Still that is not even close to the survivability of secondaries on the Bismarck/Fredrich der Grosser. So i have a question mainly focused to the wargaming staff - How can i be successful brawler if after a brawl i lose half of my secondaries armament? or sometimes 2 or 3 turrets even before brawl starts. How can i be successful brawler if my secondaries are not suited for taking any damage? Why these secondaries are so fragile if that is the only gimmick this ship has? Best regards Fodder
  4. The U. S. N. Colorado

    I was watching some reviews of the old colorado (2 years ago). I want to know if the colorado with the buff of the HP, the buff of range of shoot, the buff of accuaricy and the buff of the armor, is now a god BB
  5. Iowa, its hull & is it worth it?

    Hello everyone, I have heard alot of stories about people saying the USS Iowa is really bad and other people who were shouting that it was an amazing ship, it just needed more skill to "master" her. Now since I'm almost able to get the Iowa I wanted to know it I should buy it or if I should just stop at my North Carolina and not go any further. Also, people are saying that the Iowa has really bad protection, while I read an article that stated that actually, the Iowa had less amount of armor but it was of a way better quality which made it really strong. So did Wargaming just make it "a bad ship" according to people? Also, apparently the citadels that used to be very high before have been "fixed" so to say. Does it make it really better or just better? I'm looking forward to complete answers if possible, not just people screaming it's bad or good without proper arguments. Thank you! Kind Regards, Nathan Link to the article: (It's the 3th topic; Armor) https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-think-Iowa-would-have-been-able-to-defeat-Yamato
  6. The Damage Farm [BB Plague III]

    I am back here with my contentious opinions and weeby pics. Don't worry, this is a holiday diversion. I'm not actually back, this is a heatwave induced illusion. Fixing a recurring problem The idea of camping battleships has gone beyond the point of a meme now. The changes in game mechanic, the changes to battleships, and the release of battleship line after battleship line that are repetitively more and more immune to any type of instant destruction that many cruisers and destroyers risk. Ships like the Conqueror, which I will want to talk about later in detail, were given the improved regenerative abilities to dwarf all but the Minotaur in the list of her cruiser contemporaries despite being technically superior in armor and health to each and every one of her cruiser contemporaries with only one exception. I admit that I used to think that battleships were simply buffed over and over as a consequence of Wargaming attempting to wrongheadedly trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator to create a class that would be entirely damage proof yet at the same time far from game defining compared to their contemporaries. Looking at the changes that Wargaming has made however, I can't help but think that there is another goal beyond simply making battleships entirely immune to everything and that this is simply a consequence serving a larger and longer term goal. Whilst many of you could probably still think that I have gone insane and that marinating my brain in random so long has turned me to the dark side, I would like to defend my position by citing a few ships. I think that it is easy to say that Wargaming's balancing team is actually entirely stupid and have no idea what they are doing or that they know exactly what they are doing and that they are indeed trying to create the ubership that squashes all competition and that everyone will eventually end up playing. I am not sure how serious people are when they say that they think that Wargaming does indeed hate every class but battleships and that they will take away everything that hurts them, but I think that there is something larger going on here. The Worcester and the changes to the Japanese 100 mm guns are the causes of my suspicions. WG's newest trophy ships the Conqueror and the Republique are incredibly vulnerable to these ships with their 32 mm plates which makes it such that the Worcester and upcoming Harugumo are and will be excessively effective against these battleships thanks to their insane DPM. They are also incredibly effective against just about every cruiser contemporary and precedent to them, but that is a part of the larger argument. For now, I think that we should discuss a long and recurring issue of battleship camping and the cruisers that camp with them. The Failed Experiment The Kurfurst was something of a contentious ship when she was first released. There was the fact that she was large enough to have her own orbit and the armor to rival a Pacific Rim mech, this was to say nothing of her hydroacoustic search and her nearly invisible citadel. Back when she was first released, battleships without citadels were virtually unheard of and even the old Tirpitz could quite easily expose hers in close ranged brawling scenarios. The fact that she took 'only' 10-20k damage from incoming enemy fire was utterly unheard of. Sustaining a battleship broadside as a Yamato or a Montana at this age meant 40k damage if not instant death. This resilience, combined with her general immunity to the HE ammunition of every cruiser at the time as well as her ability to negate battleship AP to a large extent makes her incredibly strong at close ranged combat. This, combined with her secondary suite and her less than stellar main battery performance, made her the ideal ship to take into close combat. It didn't matter back then if half of her shells missed a broadsiding battleship 10 km away because it only took 2-3 citadel hits to irreparably cripple a battleship (the kinds of damage to outright kill a cruiser, but conversation for another day) which made things very simple. An American or Japanese battleship drawn into a closed range fight with a Kurfurst is dead. If they attempt to turn and run, they'll face 12 battleship caliber guns right into their broadside. If they tried to maintain their bow on position, they'll be roasted and shredded by the countless batteries of secondary guns. She could theoretically fix the problem with gameplay stasis. Whereas former battleships risked themselves far too much pushing in deeply to dislodge an enemy battleship, the Kurfurst will gain forewarning from torpedoes and her bow will protect her from incoming fire and when she opens up with her guns with admittedly poor angles, perhaps the only genuine mark of vulnerability that the battleship had, the enemy battleships would die right there. Less Stasis than Ever I promised to talk about the Haragumo and the Worcester and how they interact with the Conqueror and the Republique. Both of these ships are perhaps the largest oddity that made me reconsider my initial assumption that Wargaming was simply aiming to persistently make battleships more and more dominant in every task imaginable. These two ships are exceptionally well designed to deal with battleships like the British and the French tree crowns which is somewhat against the conceit that Wargaming wants to create a master class of ships that would dominate everything. On the other hand, I believe that Wargaming has made good on their attempt to make battleships tank more which is a bold claim to be sure. That said, I believe that I could vindicate this claim. I personally see the existence of ships that exists basically solely to either farm damage or exists to have their health pool farmed at little actual strategic implications for themselves to be an escalating problem. This is unlikely to turn around however. The impending changes to carriers will dispose of yet another decisive tactical option in the game and the introduction of yet another destroyer line with a hydroacoustic suite will heavily neuter yet another. This is something that is arguably more insidious than simply catering to the lowest rungs of players in the battleship class. Already ships that inflict continuous and undeniable damage such as the Hindenburg are held in much higher competitive regard than strategically stronger ships such as the Zao or the Minotaur as the game, more and more, continues to make the easiest and most mindless options the inherently better one. This, unlike many issues in regards to interclass balance, is unlikely to change soon. I can't help but feel we are approaching an age where dealing damage against not just cruisers but also battleships will become easy, but making that damage actually matter will only become harder and harder. The class getting screwed over the most by this whole fiasco is the cruisers again of course, their thin skin and relative visibility stopping them from being able to avoid the likes of the close to unavoidable DPM of the Worcester and the Harugumo. The game is moving away from cleverly using armor and maneuverability to defeat the enemy towards just pumping as many shells into the enemy as possible until they die and I think that is a real shame.
  7. Just looking for some additional tips on aiming on specific parts of the ship to gain the most benifit(I can calculate lead aready). Had a Helena run into a island, showing full broadside, I aimed at it, fired and got 5 bloody overpens.(fuso) And on the other hand, deleted a New Orleans who is bow in to me.(fuso) Where do you guys usually aim at to deal as much damage as possible? Currrently from my experience(t6 mm as of now) bow in or semi angled (more then 45 degrees) cruisers yields more reliable damage than even broadside ones, vs BBs pretty much all over the place,
  8. Prinz Eitel Friedrich

    Temat poświęcony, zapewne niemieckiemu "pancernikowi" premium, który nawiedzi wkrótce te wody. Choć historycznie miał to być krążownik liniowy (typu Mackensen czyli rozwinięcie typu Derffingler) albo jak po niemiecku "wielki krążownik", to tutaj staje się on pancernikiem. Co o nim sadzicie? Czy kupicie?
  9. IJN Hyuga-hybrid carrier, battleship

    Hello everybody, I have put together history and possible implementation of battleship Hyuga in World of Warships. I've had 2 optional hulls. First hull is standart battleship hull and the second is the hybrid carrier hull. Please keep in mind that this is just fan made, not official news of upcoming new ship. Also I apologize for any grammar mistakes, english is not my native language. This article has 2 parts: 1) History of the ship 2) Possible implementation in the game- Hull A - Hull B IJN Hyuga Ships of the class: -Ise (1917) -Hyuga (1918) History Creation Hyuga, named after Hyuga Province, one of the traditional provinces of Japan was laid down at the Mitsubishi Heavy Industries shipyard in Nagasaki on 6 May 1915 and launched on 27 January 1917. Hyuga was the second and last Ise-class battleship built for the Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN) during the 1910s. The Ise class was designed as an improved version of the preceding Fuso class. The twelve 45-calibre 35.6-centimetre (14 in) Type 41 guns of the Ise class were mounted in three pairs of twin-gun. The hydraulically powered turrets had an elevation capability of −5/+20 degrees. In 1921 the elevation was increased to +30 degrees and then to +43 degrees during their mid-1930s modernization. The ships' secondary armament consisted of twenty 50-calibre 14-centimetre (5.5 in) Type 3 guns in single mounts. Anti-aircraft defence was provided by four 40-calibre 3rd Year Type 8-centimetre (3 in)anti-aircraft guns in single mounts. The ships were also fitted with six submerged 53.3-centimetre (21.0 in) torpedo tubes, three on each broadside. Modernization During the ship's modernization during the 1930s, their forward superstructure was enlarged with multiple platforms added to their tripod masts to create a pagoda mast. Both ships were also given torpedo bulges to improve their underwater protection and to compensate for the weight of the additional armour. The boilers on each ship were replaced by eight new Kampon oil-fired boilers. The turbines were replaced by four geared Kampon turbines with a designed output of 80,000 shp (60,000 kW) intended to increase their speed to 24.5 knots (45.4 km/h; 28.2 mph). The fuel storage of the ships was increased which gave them a range of 7,870 nautical miles (14,580 km) at a speed of 16 knots. In 1931–1933, the AA guns were replaced with eight 40-calibre 12.7-centimetre (5.0 in) Type 89 dual-purpose guns. Two twin-gun mounts for license-built Vickers two-pounder (4-centimetre (1.6 in)) light AA guns were also added while the pair of 14 cm guns on the upper deck were removed. the torpedo tubes were removed and the Vickers two-pounders were replaced by twenty license-built Hotchkiss 2.5-centimetre (1 in) Type 96 light AA guns in 10 twin-gun mounts. Their displacement increased over 55,100 tons. The crew now numbered 1,376 officers and enlisted men. Career Although completed in 1918, she played no role in World War I. Hyuga was then assigned to the 1st Battleship Division of the 1st Fleet. Captain Kinzaburo Mimura relieved Nakegawa on 10 November. An explosion in No. 3 gun turret killed 11 crewmen and wounded another 25 during an gunnery exercise on 24 October 1919. Hyuga accidentally collided with and sank the schooner Hiromiya Maru, killing two sailors aboard the sailing ship, on 21 July 1920. On 29 August, the ship began the first of numerous patrols off the Siberian coast and in northern waters in support of Japan's Siberian Intervention against the Bolshevik Red Army. The ship aided survivors of the 1923 Great Kanto earthquake in September 1923. From the early 1920s through the late 1930s, Hyuga often cruised off the coast of China. The ship was overhauled in 1927–1928, during which her forward superstructure was enlarged and her aviation facilities improved. Beginning on 27 March 1932, she patrolled off the coast of China after the First Shanghai Incident, together with her sister ship Ise and the battlecruisers Kongo and Kirishima. Beginning on 24 October 1934, Hyūga was drydocked at Kure Naval Arsenal and underwent an extensive reconstruction and modernization that lasted until 7 September 1936. During the Second Sino-Japanese War, the ship ferried two battalions of the 3rd Sasebo Special Naval Landing Force to Port Arthur, China, on 19 August 1937. On 30 June 1940 Hyuga served as the flagship for the Emperor of Manchuoko, Henry Pu-yi, during his state visit to Japan. Together with Ise, the ship was transferred to the 2nd Battleship Division of the 1st Fleet on 15 November. Start of the Pacific War When the war started for Japan on 8 December, the division, reinforced by the battleships Nagato and Mutsu and the light carrier Hosho, sortied from Hashirajima to the Bonin Islands as distant support for the 1st Air Fleet attacking Pearl Harbor, and returned six days later. Together with the rest of the 2nd Battleship Division, Hyūga pursued but did not catch the American carrier force that had launched the Doolittle Raid on 18 April. In May 1942 while conducting gunnery practice, the breech of Hyūga's left-hand gun in her No. 5 turret exploded, killing 51 crewmen. The turret was deemed not repairable and was removed. Plate of armour was welded over the barbette and three triple mounts for 2.5 cm AA guns were installed there. While under repair, the ship was fitted with one of the first experimental Type 22 surface-search radar sets in the IJN, but it was removed shortly afterwards. Hyūga and the rest of the 2nd Battleship Division set sail on 28 May with the Aleutian Support Group at the same time that most of the Imperial Fleet began an attack on Midway Island. The division was composed of Japan's four oldest battleships, including Hyūga, accompanied by two light cruisers, 12 destroyers, and two oilers. Conversion to hybrid carriers The loss of four Japanese aircraft carriers during the Battle of Midway in June severely limited the ability of the IJN to conduct operations and alternatives were sought. Plans for full conversions of battleships into aircraft carriers were rejected on the grounds of expense and, most critically, time. The IJN settled on removing the rear pair of turrets from the Ise-class ships and replacing them with a flight deck equipped with two rotating catapults. The ship's No. 6 turret and the barbettes for No. 5 and 6 turrets were replaced by a hangar surmounted by a flight deck. This was not long enough to permit the launch of aircraft or their recovery. Two catapults were installed and the existing crane was moved to the flight deck. This was fitted with an extensive system of rails to link each catapult, the storage positions on the deck and the "T"-shaped aircraft lift that moved aircraft between the flight deck and the hangar. It had a capacity of nine aircraft, with eleven more stowed on deck, and one on each catapult for a total of twenty-two. Aichi E16A and Yokosuka D4Y Suisei dive bombers were part of Hyugo's air group. During the conversion, all of the 14 cm guns were removed and the ship's anti-aircraft suite was heavily reinforced. The eight 12.7 cm Type 89 guns were supplemented with four additional twin mounts and the existing 2.5 cm Type 96 AA twin-gun mounts were replaced by 19 triple-gun mounts for a total of 57 weapons. These changes increased the ship's overall length and reduced her displacement to 40,444. The rebuild was officially completed on 18 November. Hyuga served as a training ship for most of the first half of 1944. On 25 February, Battleship Division 2 was assigned to the direct control of the Combined Fleet. On 24 May, the ship's light anti-aircraft armament was reinforced with 24 additional Type 96 AA guns in eight triple mounts. On 7 June, a pair of improved Type 22 surface-search radars were installed. On 23 June Hyugo conducted their first catapult training. Two days later, Hyuga became the flagship of the Fourth Carrier Division. In September, six racks of 30-tube 12.7 cm anti-aircraft rocket launchers were added. Battle of Cape Engaño and afterwards After the Americans began attacking Japanese installations in the Bonin Islands on 10 October 1944, the aircraft of the Fourth Carrier Division were ordered to prepare for combat. On 14 October they attacked the aircraft carriers of Task Force 38 near Formosa with little effect and heavy losses. The ships of the Fourth Carrier Division were assigned to the Main Body of the 1st Mobile Fleet. The Main Body's role was to act as decoys to attract attention away from the two other forces approaching from the south and west. All forces were to converge on Leyte Gulf on 25 October and the Main Body left Japan on 20 October. By the morning of 24 October, the Main Body was within range of the northernmost American carriers of Task Force 38 and Ozawa ordered an air strike to attract the attention of the Americans. The Americans were preoccupied dealing with the other Japanese naval forces and defending themselves from air attacks launched from Luzon and Leyte and could not spare any aircraft to search for the Japanese carriers until the afternoon. On the morning of 25 October radar picked up the first of five American airstrikes at a range of 125 nautical miles. Fragments from near misses by bombs damaged the ship's anti-torpedo blister and she developed a 5° list that was easily corrected. The American submarine USS Halibut spotted the Fourth Carrier Division at 17:42 and manoeuvered to attack, missing with six torpedoes at 18:43. Despite being spotted by American submarines en route, the division arrived safely on 27 October. After leaving the island the following day, they were unsuccessfully attacked by the submarine USS Sea Dog before their arrival at Kure on the 29th. Between 29 October and 8 November, the catapults were removed to improve the firing arcs of No. 3 and No. 4 turrets. Hyuga and Ise departed on 11 November, loaded with troops and munitions for Manila, capital of the Philippines but were diverted to the Spratly Islands. They arrived on 14 November and their cargo was unloaded. Reinforced by the battleship Haruna and three cruisers, the sisters proceeded on to Lingga Island, near Singapore, on 20 November. They remained there until 12 December. They departed for Cam Ranh Bay, French Indochina, where they were on standby for an attack on an American supply convoy. The attack was cancelled on the 30th and the ships sailed for Singapore where they arrived on 1 January 1945 before continuing on to Lingga. On 6 February, the division sailed for Singapore to participate in Operation Kita. The sisters and the light cruiser Ōyodo were loaded with critically needed strategic war supplies (oil, rubber, tin, zinc, and mercury) and 1,150 surplus oil workers to be ferried back to Japan. The division sailed from Singapore on 10 February and was spotted by the British submarine HMS Tantalus the following day. On 13 February the submarine USS Bergall unsuccessfully attacked the ships as did the submarine USS Blower. Later that afternoon, Oyodo launched one of her floatplanes which spotted the submarine USS Bashaw on the surface about 22,000 metres ahead of the convoy. Hyuga opened fire with her main guns and forced Bashaw to submerge. The convoy reached the Matsu Islands, off the Chinese coast, on the 15th and was unsuccessfully attacked by the submarine USS Rasher. The convoy reached Kure on 20 February, having evaded or escaped pursuit by twenty-three Allied submarines along the way. Final role The 4th Carrier Division was disbanded on 1 March and Hyuga was reduced to first-class reserve. From this time until the surrender of Japan, Hyuga was anchored in Hiroshima Bay without fuel or aircraft. More than 240 American carrier-based aircraft from Task Force 58 attacked Kure on 19 March and the ship was hit by three bombs, killing 37 and wounding 52 crewmen. Her anti-aircraft guns claimed to have shot down a single Curtiss SB2C Helldiver dive bomber during the attack. Re-designated as a fourth-class reserve ship on 20 April, Hyuga was towed to a new position within Hiroshima Bay and heavily camouflaged. She was later attacked during the bombing of Kure on 24 July and was struck by 10 bombs that blew off part of her stem, destroyed her bridge and started major fires. Over 200 sailors were killed and 600 wounded by the attack. Progressive flooding caused the ship to sink in shallow water over the next several days and her crew was ordered to remove all easily accessible weapons. Hyuga was unsuccessfully attacked by 24 B-24 Liberator heavy bombers on the 29th and abandoned three days later by her crew. She was removed from the Navy List on 20 November 1945. Her wreck was raised and broken up by the Kure Dockyard of the Harima Zosen Corporation from 2 July 1946 to 4 July 1947. IJN Hyuga in World of Warships: Class: battleship/hybrid battleship or hybrid carrier Tier: VI She would be a premium ship, purchased by dublons or free XP. Her Hull A is similiar to Fuso, but Hull B is like nothing else in WoWs. Hyugo-Hull A (after second reconstruction (1934-1936), but before Hyugo was rebuilt to hybrid aircraft carrier) General characteristics: Lenght: 215.8 m (708 ft 0 in) Beam: 31.75 m (104 ft 2 in) Draught: 9.45 m (31 ft 0 in) Displacement -loaded: 42,001 long tons (42,675 tons) Maneuverability: Engine power: 60,000 kW (80,000 horsepower) Maximum speed: 24.5 knots (45.4 km/h; 28.2 mph) Turning circle radius: 750 m Rudder shift time: 15,1 sec. Armor and hitpoints: Hitpoints: 57,500 HP Armor: -belt (maximum thickness): 299 mm (11.8 in) -strake: 100 mm (3.9 in) -upper armoured deck: 55 mm (2.2 in) -lower armoured deck: 30 mm (1.2 in) -turrets: -face: 254 mm (10 in) -roof: 76 mm -casamate armour: 149 mm (5.9 in) -barbettes: 299 mm -conning tower: 349,25 (13.75 in) Torpedo damage reduction: 36% Main armament: Main armament: 6x2 356 mm/45 41st Year Type Caliber: 356 mm (14 in) Rate of fire: 2,14 shots/min. Reload time: 28 sec. Rotation speed: 3,2 deg. per second Firing range: 21,81 km Maximum dispersion: 226m HE shell: 356 mm HE Type0 Maximum HE shell damage: 5,700 Chance of fire on Target caused by HE shell: 25% Initial HE shell velocity: 805m/s HE shell weight: 625kg AP shell: 356 mm AP Type91 Maximum AP shell damage: 10,200 Initial AP shell velocity: 775m/s AP shell weight: 673,5kg Secondary armament: 1) 4x2 127 mm/40 Type89 A1 -range: 4km -rate of fire: 12 shots/min. -reload time: 5sec. -HE shell: 127 mm HE Type0 -maximum HE shell damage: 2,100 -initial HE shell velocity: 725 m/s -chance of fire on target caused by HE Shell: 8% 2) 16x1 140 mm/50 3rd Year Type -range: 4km -rate of fire: 7,5 shots/min. -reload time: 8sec. -AP shell: 140 mm AP Type2 -maximum HE shell damage: 2,700 -initial HE shell velocity: 850 m/s Anti aircraft defence: (1943 configuration) Long range (5km): 4x2 127 mm/40 Type89 A1 Medium range (3km): 10x2 25 mm/60 Type96 Twin mod. 1 Short range (2km): none Concealment: Surface detectability range: 18.5 km Air detectability range: 11.92 km Consumables: -Damage control party: -90sec. cooldown -infinite charges -Repair party: -citadel repair: 10% -healing: 0.5% of maximum hit points per second -duration: 28 seconds -cooldown: 120 seconds -charges: 3 -Spotting aircraft: -duration: 100 seconds -cooldown: 360 seconds -charges: 3 Hyuga-Hull B As hybrid carrier (1945) General characteristics: Lenght: 219.62 m (720 ft 6 in) Beam: 31.71 m (104 ft 0 in) Draught: 9.03 m (29 ft 8 in) Displacement -loaded: 39,805 long tons (40,444 t) Maneuverability: Engine power: 60,000 kW (80,000 horsepower) Maximum speed: 25,5 knots Turning circle radius: 750 m Rudder shift time: 15,1 sec. Armor and hitpoints Hitpoints: 57,500 HP Armor: -belt (maximum thickness): 299 mm (11.8 in) -strake: 100 mm (3.9 in) -upper armoured deck: 55 mm (2.2 in) -lower armoured deck: 30 mm (1.2 in) -turrets: -face: 254 mm (10 in) -roof: 76 mm -casamate armour: 149 mm (5.9 in) -barbettes: 299 mm -conning tower: 349,25 (13.75in) Torpedo damage reduction: 36% Main armament: Main armament: 4x2 356 mm/45 41st Year Type Caliber: 356 mm (14 in) Rate of fire: 2,14 shots/min. Reload time: 28 sec. Rotation speed: 3,2 deg. per second Firing range: 21,81 km Maximum dispersion: 226m HE shell: 356 mm HE Type0 Maximum HE shell damage: 5,700 Chance of fire on Target caused by HE shell: 25% Initial HE shell velocity: 805m/s HE shell weight: 625kg AP shell: 356 mm AP Type91 Maximum AP shell damage: 10,200 Initial AP shell velocity: 775m/s AP shell weight: 673,5kg Secondary armament: 1) 8x2 127 mm/40 Type89 A1 -range: 4km -rate of fire: 12 shots/min. -reload time: 5sec. -HE shell: 127 mm HE Type0 -maximum HE shell damage: 2,100 -initial HE shell velocity: 725 m/s -chance of fire on target caused by HE Shell: 8% Anti aircraft defence: Long range (5km): 8x2 127 mm/40 Type89 A1 Medium range (3km): - 31x3 25 mm/60 Type96 Triple mod. 1 - 11x1 25 mm/60 Type96 mod. 1 Short range (2km): 6x1 30-round 12.7 cm AA rocket launchers Air group: Fighters: Mitsubishi A6M2 -speed: 162 knots -average damage per second: 44 -loadout: 60 -hitpoints: 1210 HP (Althought Hyuga didn't originally have A6M2, I think that only one type of planes is inadequate and giving her Aichi E16A reconnaissance floatplanes just for spotting (without any armament) isn't good enought. A6M2 can do spotting and can attack smaller groups of aircraft.) Dive bombers: Yokosuka D4Y2 -speed: 139 knots -maximum bomb damage: 4600 HP (HE bomb) -hit points: 1,400 HP (I nerfed Yokosuka D4Y2 stats. Shokaku has Yokosuka D4Y2 dive bombers at tier VIII. For balancing reasons i nerfed them to be comperable to tier VII planes because Hyuga can face tier VIII opponents and she has total hangar capacity of only 22 planes...) Hyuga can't have any torpedo bombers because she has short flight deck (and heavy aircraft need long) and torpedo bombers in combination with 356mm guns would be devastating combination. Flight control mod: 1st flight control mod: - 1 fighter group - 1 dive bomber groups This is more balanced control mod. 2nd flight control mod: - 0 fighter groups - 2 dive bomber groups This is for aggressive playstyle. Hyugo would have (just like any other IJN carrier) groups with 4 planes in each of them. I think that she can't have more than 2 goups of planes. The higher claim on micro-management would be only for the best players and loosing 2 turrets for 3 groups of planes is little bit too good. Hangar capacity: 22 planes Special feature: Every aircraft carrier in the game, when is set on fire, can't launch/receive planes (if you don't have Captain skill-Emergency Takeoff). This would be a problem for this ship. If you want to play this ship at 100%, you need to use your guns and planes. For this to happen, you have to stay idealy in second line. Here you can be exposed to fire. There you can be set on fire by HE shells. Because this is hybrid aircraft carrier, I think that I have a solution for this problem. The only way to disable launching planes by being on fire, is to be set on fire on the stern, where the hangar and catapult is located. This way you can still launch planes even though your bow or middle section of this ship is on fire. Controling the ship: Following text has some controls same as normal aircraft carrier in WoWs. The reason why I am writing this so detailed is simple- to fully understand the controlling of this ship. This ship would have 2 mods- battleship mod and aircraft carrier mod. 1st mod- battleship: Hyuga would be just like any other battleship. You control ship with WASD keys (turning, increasing/decreasing speed), aiming with your guns and firing with them. Your air group would be controlled by AI. It will target the nearest visible vessel with dive bombers and attacking the nearest palnes with fighters. If you press CTRL+ right clicking on the enemy ship (left click is for secondary armament), you will specify a target you want to attack and AI will follow these orders. Same apllies for fighter and enemy planes. Other way to give orders to group is by selecting it, by pressing key 3 or 4 (key 1 is for loading guns with HE shells, key 2 is for AP shells) and clicking on the minimap. The selected group will fly to the area and stay there. If you want to go from controlling air group back to operating with your guns, then you simply press key 1 or 2 and it will switch back. With this method selected air group will stay in ordered location and it won't attack any ship (in case of fighters-enemy planes). For attacking a ship you must select the ship manualy (CTRL+right click on the enemy ship). If you want to return your air group for resupply, then you press F, this however will happen automatically after consumption of all amunition. This mod allows you to better control your ship and fire your main guns by your self. 2nd mod- aircraft carrier: After pressing key M, you will look at the large map and control your ship just like other carrier in the game. However, there are few differences. Main battery will be controlled by AI and will fire at the nearest visible enemy ship in range, that isn't in cover (behind island,...). You can, again, specify target for AI by pressing CTRL+right clicking on the enemy ship you want to attack (CTRL+left click is for secondary armament). By pressing key 1 or 2, you will change the amunition for AI. By pressing key Q (aircraft carriers have this under key 1, but this one is already used...) and clicking on the map, you will activate auto-pilot. This mod allows you to better control your planes and do the manual drop for dive bombers or fighters. For return to 1st mod, you press key M again. Special function: If you don't want to AI fire your guns (28 sec. reload time isn't short), you can press R key. After pressing the key again, the AI will resume firing at the nearest enemy ship. This function is for someone who likes to aim him self. AI control guns at long range aren't that accurate after all. Concealment: Surface detectability range: 18.5 km Air detectability range: 11.92 km. Consumables: -Damage control party: -90sec. cooldown -infinite charges -Repair party: -citadel repair: 10% -healing: 0.5% of maximum hit points per second -duration: 28 seconds -cooldown: 120 seconds -charges: 3 Summary: Hull A Hull A is for any player. It's not difficult to control it or know, how to play with it. The IJN Hyuga is really close to Fuso: -same amount of main guns of the same caliber in very similiar layout -speed, turning circle radious and rudder shift time are almost the same -concealment is practically the same -same amount of secondary guns However, there are few minor differences: -Hyuga has smaller caliber secondary guns with faster reload -Hyuga has slightly better armour and 400 HP more -Fuso has better AA medium range defence Hyuga, just like Fuso, has more smaller caliber main guns than other tier VI counterparts. She has large health pool and great torpedo protection. She can keep up with other friendly ships and has good agility. She also doesn't have great AA defence and has large pagoda mast which is easily set on fire. Hull B Hull B is for experienced players. If hull B would be implemented in game, she would be the most difficult ship to play while 100% using every benefit of this ship. The micro-management is key to success. Thanks to her battleship status, she could be in games, where no aircraft carriers are and take advantage of it. Hyuga can spot enemy ships for your allies and you, enemy torpedoes approaching to your ship or reset the cap while you are on the other side of the map. Her ability to launch planes will be stopped only by setting the stern on fire (unless you take Emergency take off for your captain). She is also the only "carrier" that has Repair party consumable. If we compare Hull B Hyuga to other battleships: -Hyuga has the best AA defence -Hyuga has less guns than Fuso, New Mexico, Normandie, Dunkerque and Arizona -Hyuga has low caliber guns -Hyuga has good health pool and torpedo reduction and agility From this compariso we can see, that if Hyuga wants to stay competitive, than she needs to use combination of her guns and aircraft. Playing the Hyuga will be difficult and will take time to get use to it. However, this battleship can offer unique and rewarding gameplay. IJN Hyuga could be implemented in WoWs but I think that she would be only in Hull A variant. Hull B variant probably won't be implemented in game, thanks to difficult gameplay and balancing reasons. (It is also the strangest looking battleship I have ever seen) I will be glad if you leave your comment below. I hope you enjoyed this article and have a nice day. Resourses: Informations: wikipedia- Japanese battleship Hyuga Book- Encyklopedie Válečných lodí od 2. světové války až po současnost, Robert Jackson, Naše Vojsko Book- The Encyclopedia of Sea Warfare, from the first ironclads to the present day, Oliver Warner, Spring books, a Salamander book Pictures: Wikipedia-Japanese battleship Hyuga Blueprints-ships-Battleship Hyuga
  10. Wich faction have the better BB?

    I have tier Nagato, New Mexico and Scharnhorst and I want to star other line of bb but I dont know what is better, ¿ English BB, french or germans? Thanks to all the people who answer my question.
  11. Musashi isn't balance

    Goodmorning, what do you think about the musachi? I think is too stronk tier 9 bb, i have the izumo and i can't do anything for counter that ship
  12. Iowa AA is missing

    I have observed long ago that Iowa is missing a ton of Oerlikon mounts, by the end of the War she had 19 quad Bofors mounts and 52 single Oerlikon mounts, however in the game once you hit C hull, she only has 32 dual Oerlikon mounts. I ask why? The Alabama has the exact number of 52 single Oerlikon mounts and they're great just the way they are, so why doesn't Iowa boast the same historically accurate loadout that the Alabama does? Iowa is missing: -2 Oerkilon mounts on her bow -2 Oerlikon mounts directly fore of her foremost two Bofors mounts, just in front of Turret #1 -3 Oerlikon mounts on top of Turret #2 -2/2 Oerlikon mounts on each side, 1/1 just behind 5" guns 51 and 52 (her foremost dual 5" mounts) For those that do not know, on the NC-class, SoDak-class and the Iowa-class, their 10 5" mounts were 1, 3, 5, 7, 9 on her starboard and 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 on her port side, ie: 51, 52, 53, etc. the 5 indicating the caliber of the guns. And 1/1 Oerlikon mounts just fore of the two lateral Mark 37 gun directors on the two sides of the front funnel -9 Oerlikon mounts just aft of her #3 Turret Alabama's AA layout has been rendered in a historically accurate manner, Iowa's should be as well.
  13. Bullet Spread und Zielerfassung.

    Hey, bin noch recht neu in dem Spiel aber habe mich direkt in die Schlachtschiffe verliebt. Nun habe ich irgendwo gehört das man Ziele erfassen kann (Sichere Erfassung ?) damit die Granaten nicht so weit verteilt auf das anvisierte Schiff fliegen sondern in kleinen Gruppen mit höherer Trefferwahrscheinlichkeit. Jetzt interessiert mich eben ob es dafür eine manuelle Erfassung gibt die ich erst irgendwie aufschalten muss oder ob das Spiel das auch automatisch macht (Dieses Fadenkreuz um das gegnerische Schiffssymbol ? ) Danke schon mal im vorraus, MfG euer Hammond.
  14. Hey there everyone, So I'm in the process of grinding for credits in the Missouri, but there was a forum post on the NA sever, where someone said that if you go after DDs and a couple of cruisers, you'd make a higher amount of credits than if you were going after Battleships, due to the way the reward systems work. Is this true? I know that Missouri has the tools to hunt destroyers, but does it really pay off? and if it isn't true, what targets DO make your more credits? Missouri does NOT make 1,000,000 credits per game: This was the title of the post Until Next post, USSARIZONA_2015
  15. Strike Groups - 16 Team Tournament

    Strike Groups A unique gameplay mode not currently offered in Warships. Currently Carrier gameplay is either solitary 1v1 or unorganised 2v2 (Tier 7 and below) matches in random battles. In “competitive” game modes Carriers are excluded from Clan Battles and in King of the Sea, the Carrier is relegated to a glorified scout unable to effectively strike (until very late-game) due to the hostile Anti-Air & Defensive fire nature of Tier 8-10 gameplay. There is no gamemode similar to the Battle of Midway for example with organised Strike groups battling it out against each other. So lets make our own then! In this 3CV1BB game mode, the Strike Group must learn to work together in the chaotic battle-space on April the 28th 2018! The Gameplay ruleset is a little different from anything done before. Team composition: Teams must consist of three carriers and one battleship All ships must be Tier 7 Maximum of two Premium ships allowed per team Each premium must be unique (ie one of each only) Hiryu and Saipan must played in a “Balanced setup” Hiryu 2-2-2, Saipan 2-2-0 Teams that bring 3-1-2 or 3-0-1 setups will forfeit that game! Tournament format: (Glossary; Game = Single battle between two teams, Round = Best of 3 played games) 16 teams in a single elimination format tournament on the European Server Each round of the tournament is played in a Best of 3 games format Maps: Both teams play as North and South on the map “Okinawa” Tiebreaker (1-1 score) games are played on the map “Ocean” Game format: Battles take place in the "Training Room" Game mode is “Standard Battle” with 20 minutes gametime Teams must take screenshots of the match result to help resolve any disputes At least one member of a team must have replays enabled to help resolve any disputes Teams can swap lineups after each game Teams can “gg” to admit defeat in a game Game Victory conditions; Sink all enemy ships Capture enemy base Win by ingame points if 20 minutes gametime expires If a Draw occurs (equal points after 20 minutes) neither team scores a point If score is 1-0 and a draw occurs neither team scores a point. The team with 1 point wins the best of 3 (tiebreaker is only for 0-0 or 1-1 scores) If first game ends in a draw, the winner of the second game wins the best of 3 (tiebreaker is only for 0-0 or 1-1 scores) If the second game results in a draw the Tiebreaker is played (ie 0-0 score after two games) If a tiebreaker game ends in a draw the winning team is decided by most enemy planes killed In the highly unlikely event a tiebreaker ends in a draw and both teams have equal enemy plane kills… I’m going to flip a coin. Teams signup: Teams can sign up via our Discord, or in this thread (only requests after 7th April 09:00 CEST will secure a position in the tournament) Sign up is on a first come basis Teams sign up as either from a Clan group or a custom named team (ie multiple teams from one clan or members from multiple clans coming together to form one team) Teams can be no larger than 5 players (4 active & 1 reserve) Teams that sign up must provide a roster of their members No player can play for more than one team/clan Discord: Discord is the main platform for answering questions and posting updates for teams. At least one of your team members must be available on discord. You can join using this link Rewards: Thanks to WarGaming for providing prizes to the top three placed teams First place is awarded a Tier 7 Premium Battleship or Aircraft Carrier of choice Second place is awarded 25 x FTW Camouflage + 25 x Hydra signal Third place is awarded 7 days premium (bonus code) Schedule & Stream: Entire tournament takes place over Saturday the 28th April 2018 First Round starts at 14:00 CEST with the Finals ending no later than 20:00 CEST Estimated Round Start times can be found here Challonge Tournament Bracket Link can be found after we have 16 signed up teams (I hope we get 16!) Most of the tournament will be casted & streamed by Farazelleth (ie me) @ twitch.tv/farazelleth Anyone else wishing to cast additional games please feel free to get in contact. Signups will open on Saturday the 7th of April at 09:00 CEST Please read the rules fully before registering
  16. Eventually Vanguard would make its appearence in World of warships, Hopefully in the tier 8 or even 9 bracket. What would you like to be the ships features and characteristics? I hope for a design that emphasizes on AP rather than HE, deadly accurate guns, nice handling, good penetration values. Since it was the world last battleship to be completed, it should reflect qualities that made the ship better than its predecessors. Although it has only 8 15" guns similar to Warspite, Hood and many other RN battleships, it could make use of the supercharge propellant and better fire control direction. What do you think?
  17. American battleships' Gun Director bug

    Why do the Mark 37 gun directors (4 can be found on most battleships and on destroyers like the Fletcher, Benson, etc.) on American battleships turn with the main batteries? The Mark 37s guided the dual purpose 5" guns. It was only the Mark 38s that guided the main batteries (the ones on the two highest points of US BBs: can be observed on Iowa-class, Montana-class, North Carolina-class, South Dakota-class). Wargaming only got the Alabama's directors right as they don't turn with the main batteries, only the Mark 38s do. Although it would be cool if the Mark 37s did turn with the Mark 28 5" dual turrets on BBs.
  18. Missouri performance.

    How's Missouri performing for you, battleship captains? I mean recent performance. I don't want to suggest anything, but from my meager observations, and other reports from clans and forums, a lot of people started to complain about this ship. Dispersion, penetration and AP damage got worse - mainly that is what people often say about Missouri. Don't want to put a tin foil hat on my head, but I am just wondering whether there's more people who observed something similar.
  19. Which class determines victory? Answer the poll above - A really simple question which I find myself arguing over endlessly with clanmates. I find there is also a very big problem currently with the game because of my opinion on this. If equal numbers of ships on each team, which carries? Which class seriously and simply outright determines the outcome of a battle? We're talking random battles here and I've left carriers out of this poll on purpose.
  20. Star Wars Tech Vs Arpeggio of Blue Steel Tech

    Hey There Fellas, Before any of you ask why I'm asking this, I am currently writing a story, and I am stuck at a problem. since Normal Ships cannot harm arpeggio Ships without using a vibration warhead, I was going to implement the Imperial I Class Star Destroyer as a way of countering the Fleet of fog, but would It work? can a Star Destroyer's weapons Break through an Arpeggio ships force field, or a "Klein Field" ? Or maybe better stated, Can a Star Destroyers Tech overcome Arpeggio Tech? Thanks for any Info! Until Next Post, USSARIZONA_2015 PS, I'm an Idiot for asking this :S
  21. Get rid of Izumo

    Before we go any further I do have experience with the Dunkerque with its two forward turrets and I deliberately bought this ship in order to get used to the unusual gun configuration that would be on the Izumo. In other words I know how to play the ship. The Izumo as a battleship at tier 9 is simply just not cut out for the tier. The Amagi would be better suited for tier 9 than the Izumo. Due to the large size of the Izumo it has poor concealment even with the upgrades resulting in many occasions where a cruiser can spam HE rounds without revealing their position to me that's how bad it is. The 410mm guns are nothing short of shotguns and that's with the B Hull. They do little damage if they even hit the target and completely fail to penetrate an Iowa at 5km. Playing with the Amagi these guns were good even with the RNG. Just simply put the Izumo a fire magnet and I'll confess I've enjoyed shooting at them with the Amagi the ship is an easy target to hit. There were many design prototypes back in the 1930s with Izumo being one of them, perhaps WG should look into finding something else or rearrange the tech tree like they did with Japanese destroyers, i.e. the Fubuki becoming tier 6. What do you guys think, is it worth keeping it at tier 9 on the Japanese tech tree or should another ship take its place?
  22. The question is, devs forgot about this module(maybe because it wasn't avilable for bbs since now) or we eventually get it to battleships too, because currently we can't use it on them as the description says :(
  23. How To Play American Battleships?

    hey there Fellas, So I know this might have already been answered years and Years ago, but i wanted to ask for myself... How do I play American Battleships in today's meta and the meta to come? such as how to support your fleet in the right way, or when is the right time to push, or when it isn't the right time to push, or when to tank and how to do it properly, or what tier is good for practicing US BBs. I will be upfront and say that I'm aggressive when it comes to playing American Battleships, mostly because I don't want to be known as a camper, but I end up usually sinking in the end because of how I push, and its led me to ask, what am I doing wrong? I appreciate any advice given! Until Next Post, USSARIZONA_2015
  24. Heavy Baguettes

    Question is , who was lucky enough to get a misson from the boxes and got the french battleships now , are we going to keep them after they gets released?
  25. After abusing my new uberlikes to further my anti-battleship agenda and finally digging myself out of my self-perpetuated cycle of procrastination, I'm baaaack~ Before we go on into this article, I would like to extend my public and formal apology to @El2aZeR for something else. He has helped me greatly in creating an article meant to instruct newer carrier players on the art of carriers. That has been indefinitely postponed. The Universal Class The term "universal class" can mean different things. It could mean a generalist class that could do just about anything, it could mean the most average class with the most balanced abilities across the stat sheets, or it could mean the class that is meant to take up the largest numbers of spots in a team. In a game where a single player manages many units, this is fundamentally different from a game where the matchmaker has a first come first serve policy. A game where the class that is meant to occupy the largest number of spots in a team but doesn't is an imbalanced game. The battleship numbers at the medium to high tiers in particular is passed imbalanced. The scale has tipped off balanced, tumbled off the table, and rolled itself into the Marinara trenched. A panda's diet is more balanced than the game right now, and the nerfs to the battleship class and buffs to the cruiser class has done little to address the problems with the game. This article isn't about what to nerf on battleships but to talk about why I think that the battleship plague was as inevitable as the heat death or any conversation about religion, politics, or waifus destroying friendships. The problem ultimately is relatively simple: cruisers fail as a universal class. People may think of this as an oversimplification, so to refute this I would like to cite the third law of thermodynamics: "das is always right". Whilst many war games would start newer players off with a smaller unit and let them work their way up to heavier armed units, WoWS starts you off with a cruiser. Cruisers, as opposed to destroyers, are also the most numerous class in the game in terms of variety with them contributing far more silver ships than any other class. This is all the more worrying in the context of the game where cruiser numbers quite commonly can go as low as 1 per team where it's an anomaly for battleship numbers to dip below 3 and numbers from 4-6 are far from rare. There are many who argue against the battleship plague even being a thing, but the numbers speak far louder than any flimsy ad hoc justification and arguments from personal incredulity possibly could. It is a fact that some of the worst players in the game find battleships rewarding and that battleships are far more common than just about any other class at the higher tiers in particular. I am of the belief that players will eventually gravitate towards the state of maximum reward for minimum effort which is where I believe the problem comes in. The problem isn't that battleships overperform or that they have too much armor or even that they could do too much damage. Being the class that does the most damage or has the most armor isn't fundamentally a problem, it's the way that the problems compound that causes the problem. The underlying issue is that battleships are simply performs the role of a better universal ship class than cruisers and the issue lies with the game mechanics themselves and will not be fixed by twiddling with the class performance. The Battleship Problem Much has been made of the battleship plague. The nigh-extinction of cruisers and carriers at the medium to higher tiers, the resurgence in torpedo boat destroyers, and the dominance of the Midway on damage charts are all symptoms of the larger battleship problem. The battleship problem is far reaching due to the fact that the game is built around them not being the universal class. The ability for battleships to kill other ship classes in a single salvo whilst persistently resisting incoming damage would be fine if they were a slightly rarer and more difficult to master class from a gameplay perspective. The problem, however, is that everything in the battleship class from the way that overmatching functions to the ease on transitioning between nations is characteristic of a universal and not a specialist class. Bang Bang Goes the Sniper Attack of the Clones Compensation Much? More Unnecessary Armor Battleships, Shore to Salty Shore Playing the Numbers Power of the Heart Cruisers and the Specialist Class Before I make this point, I would like to you a little more about myself. I am terrible with destroyers. Destroyers, basically being small ships, are a bit like children and I react to children like most people react to parasitic worms. That is what children are anyways with their tiny malformed bodies and- The point behind this is that despite being a poor destroyer captain, I chose the American destroyers as one of my first destroyer lines. With the Farragut, I would be able to average 40k damage against enemy ships by sitting in a smoke screen and raining fire on enemy battleships. For reference, this meant that my first tier 6 destroyer averaged better damage than my first tier 8 cruiser. I was able to do this because back then, high explosive caliber basically didn’t matter. As long as you could get shells down range and hit the target, you would deal hideous amounts of damage against whatever you are shooting at. It was the age where the St. Louis, Cleveland, and Mogami were the most powerful ships in the seas. I would talk about some solutions, but I quite frankly think that this article has gone on for quite long enough even by my standards. If this feels like an abrupt end, that’s because it really was. You may consider this to be an artifact of me going rusty after not having done an article for so long but you’d be wrong. There are things that Wargaming could do from tooling battleship into something more or a generalist class than it is now to changes to the cruiser class to make them the easier class for newer players. That will have to wait until later. It’s a bit like a DLC to milk even more attention.So you see, I’m not incompetent. I’m just evil. All the best.