BelRiose Alpha Tester 238 posts 5,689 battles Report post #1 Posted September 22, 2015 (edited) Tashkent, 40 knots fast, built in Livorno by OTO shipyards... The prototype of italian "Capitani Romani" class.She must be painted in BLUE! PS: 43,5 knots!PPS: not really blue, italian grey that seems a pale blue... Edited September 22, 2015 by BelRiose 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[LAI] Nagine Beta Tester 680 posts 3,140 battles Report post #2 Posted September 22, 2015 Tashkent, 40 knots fast, built in Livorno by OTO shipyards... The prototype of italian "Capitani Romani" class. She must be painted in BLUE! PS: 43,5 knots! PPS: not really blue, italian grey that seems a pale blue... Perhaps that's the reason why Italian tree is unlikely. WG doesn't want to use clones for it from the Russian tree ;) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[-IFF-] ValerioWTF Alpha Tester 151 posts 4,255 battles Report post #3 Posted September 22, 2015 I don't think it's unlikely. Probably it's more realistic to wait for an italian tree than a french one Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IamTroublemaker Beta Tester 2,287 posts 11,047 battles Report post #4 Posted September 22, 2015 Perhaps that's the reason why Italian tree is unlikely. WG doesn't want to use clones for it from the Russian tree ;) Q: Where is XYZ Nation? Are you planning to add other nations? A: Currently we have American and Japanese tech trees. Soviet and German Navy's are being developed side by side and the Royal Navy (British) will then follow. We also plan to include Italian and French navy's. It's important for players to understand that modelling a ship can take anything from 3 to 7 months and we can only work on so many nations/branches at once. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Userext Beta Tester 5,342 posts 2,957 battles Report post #5 Posted September 22, 2015 PS: 43,5 knots! PPS: not really blue, italian grey that seems a pale blue... 43.5 at trials 40-41 full armament It is a russian destroyer so i doubt they will paint it like italian colour Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deamon93 Sailing Hamster 3,124 posts 1,275 battles Report post #6 Posted September 22, 2015 43.5 at trials 40-41 full armament It is a russian destroyer so i doubt they will paint it like italian colour The Russians kept the original paint on, hence why they nicknamed her "cobalt blue cruiser"(being quite large for them, how cute of them ) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Historynerd Beta Tester 4,249 posts 848 battles Report post #7 Posted September 22, 2015 Not to be picky, but it'll be more like an Italian-built ship. Besides, as much as it was the basis for the Capitani Romani, it was not exactly identical, so forgive me, but I'm not that hyped... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[BW-UK] Yorkie_GBR Beta Tester 331 posts 3,883 battles Report post #8 Posted September 22, 2015 Second only to the Royal Navy I can't wait for the Italians to come in game. What is not to like about the sexy DD's and Cruisers they have, not too keen on their BB's but that's just me 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Historynerd Beta Tester 4,249 posts 848 battles Report post #9 Posted September 22, 2015 What is not to like about the sexy DD's and Cruisers they have, not too keen on their BB's but that's just me Tastes are tastes; everyone is entitled to have their own. And to be honest, while I do like the Duilio and Littorio-classes, on the aesthetic side I don't appreciate the Cavour-class very much. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[DMAS] rigawe Beta Tester 313 posts 2,716 battles Report post #10 Posted September 22, 2015 I don't think it's unlikely. Probably it's more realistic to wait for an italian tree than a french one any reason for that? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Historynerd Beta Tester 4,249 posts 848 battles Report post #11 Posted September 22, 2015 any reason for that? Well, one argument for having the Italian tree before the French one is that the Italian ships saw much more combat in WWII, even though the Marine Nationale was by tonnage superior by a margin to the Regia Marina; I am personally ok with either way it comes out, before or after. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[SPUDS] Unintentional_submarine [SPUDS] Beta Tester 4,052 posts 8,765 battles Report post #12 Posted September 22, 2015 Not to be picky, but it'll be more like an Italian-built ship. Besides, as much as it was the basis for the Capitani Romani, it was not exactly identical, so forgive me, but I'm not that hyped... Quite. By the same argument the Kongo would be a British ship. Designed by a Brit and first ship built by Wickers. But that's not exactly a great argument. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Historynerd Beta Tester 4,249 posts 848 battles Report post #13 Posted September 22, 2015 Quite. By the same argument the Kongo would be a British ship. Designed by a Brit and first ship built by Wickers. But that's not exactly a great argument. That might be a good comparison. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nockerl Beta Tester 49 posts 885 battles Report post #14 Posted September 22, 2015 Tashkent, 40 knots fast, built in Livorno by OTO shipyards... The prototype of italian "Capitani Romani" class. She must be painted in BLUE! PS: 43,5 knots! PPS: not really blue, italian grey that seems a pale blue... Ferrari inbound ! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Historynerd Beta Tester 4,249 posts 848 battles Report post #15 Posted September 22, 2015 Ferrari inbound ! For that, they should have painted her red! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deamon93 Sailing Hamster 3,124 posts 1,275 battles Report post #16 Posted September 22, 2015 Italy designed and built a number of ships for export, Tashkent was one just of them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[DMAS] rigawe Beta Tester 313 posts 2,716 battles Report post #17 Posted September 22, 2015 Ferrari inbound ! There should be faster than that... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DestoryerO_o Beta Tester 188 posts 384 battles Report post #18 Posted September 22, 2015 Tashkent was not a DD! - It was a DL - in other words, Destroyer Leader - a Light Cruiser of sorts. - Tashkent's sailed at speeds of 40+ knots only during speed trials while being without turrets, guns, and ammunition. - Tashkent had almost exactly the same displacement as IJN Yubari. If WG staff adds this ship into the game as an destroyer, with speed of 40 knots, i will just consider them noobs at reading and interpreting history books. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[BAD-A] cherry2blost [BAD-A] Beta Tester 2,078 posts 22,300 battles Report post #19 Posted September 22, 2015 Tashkent was not a DD! - It was a DL - in other words, Destroyer Leader - a Light Cruiser of sorts. - Tashkent's sailed at speeds of 40+ knots only during speed trials while being without turrets, guns, and ammunition. - Tashkent had almost exactly the same displacement as IJN Yubari. If WG staff adds this ship into the game as an destroyer, with speed of 40 knots, i will just consider them noobs at reading and interpreting history books. Edited it for you for emphasis.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pivke Beta Tester 542 posts 3,394 battles Report post #20 Posted September 22, 2015 Tashkent was not a DD! - It was a DL - in other words, Destroyer Leader - a Light Cruiser of sorts. - Tashkent's sailed at speeds of 40+ knots only during speed trials while being without turrets, guns, and ammunition. - Tashkent had almost exactly the same displacement as IJN Yubari. If WG staff adds this ship into the game as an destroyer, with speed of 40 knots, i will just consider them noobs at reading and interpreting history books. so its a cruiser, like Kuma. still great Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[POI-Z] xCaptainObviousx Weekend Tester 1,244 posts Report post #21 Posted September 22, 2015 so its a cruiser, like Kuma. still great No, like the Yubari: a CL with all the drawbacks of a DD... and the weaknesses of a CL. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Historynerd Beta Tester 4,249 posts 848 battles Report post #22 Posted September 22, 2015 Tashkent was not a DD! - It was a DL - in other words, Destroyer Leader - a Light Cruiser of sorts. - Tashkent's sailed at speeds of 40+ knots only during speed trials while being without turrets, guns, and ammunition. - Tashkent had almost exactly the same displacement as IJN Yubari. If WG staff adds this ship into the game as an destroyer, with speed of 40 knots, i will just consider them noobs at reading and interpreting history books. Um... destroyer leaders and light cruisers are not the same. Granted, some light cruisers did perform as leaders of destroyer flotillas (especially around WWI, although some acted in such role even much after), but it does not mean that a destroyer leader had the same capabilities or the same tactical role as a light cruiser. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DestoryerO_o Beta Tester 188 posts 384 battles Report post #23 Posted September 22, 2015 Um... destroyer leaders and light cruisers are not the same. Granted, some light cruisers did perform as leaders of destroyer flotillas (especially around WWI, although some acted in such role even much after), but it does not mean that a destroyer leader had the same capabilities or the same tactical role as a light cruiser. (a light cruiser >of sorts<) DL are in vast majority of cases somewhat of a morph between DD and CL, tho this one is really on the big side and fits more in the later category. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Historynerd Beta Tester 4,249 posts 848 battles Report post #24 Posted September 22, 2015 (a light cruiser >of sorts<) DL are in vast majority of cases somewhat of a morph between DD and CL, tho this one is really on the big side and fits more in the later category. Big side? It displaces more or less the same than a Type 1936A-class or a Le Fantasque-class destroyer... the Capitani Romani-class was much bigger, and some even consider it a big and heavy super-destroyer/destroyer leader. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[PKTZS] JapLance Weekend Tester 2,567 posts 18,265 battles Report post #25 Posted September 22, 2015 Tashkent was not a DD! - It was a DL - in other words, Destroyer Leader - a Light Cruiser of sorts. - Tashkent's sailed at speeds of 40+ knots only during speed trials while being without turrets, guns, and ammunition. - Tashkent had almost exactly the same displacement as IJN Yubari. If WG staff adds this ship into the game as an destroyer, with speed of 40 knots, i will just consider them noobs at reading and interpreting history books. Would you consider the big destroyers of the French Navy cruisers? Or the Leningrads? Or the Scott and Shakespeare classes? They were all destroyer leaders, but not cruisers. Cruisers have something destroyers don't: armor. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
