Tzarevitch

It shouldn't take nearly that long. The model is already in the game. WV '44 is basically the same as California but with Colorado's guns. It's just a question of if they choose to do it. Lol

I got the 1500 steel. I'm quite pleased. :)

Nautilus is much more likely. She was basically an improved version of Argonaut and much more successful and famous.

For fun factor and history, Enterprise. The rocket and AP nerfs took it down from its lofty OP heights but it is still quite powerful and flexible. People say the rocket nerf severely weakened her but that isnt true. The rocket planes turn on a dime, the launch window is one of the shortest of any CV and the rockets are fast and hit hard. Against a DD you now have to lead about a half inch ahead. That's it. She can still kill a DD in 2-3 attacks. Big E's biggest downside is her AP bombs are situational against BBs. They can only citadel about half of the ones she can see. If you are facing a teamfull of the ones she cant citadel, they become useless. I use Lex when I need an All-arounder. Kaga is second mainly because her planes are so fragile they die fast when uptierred. Her hull is also really slow. If she gets caught out of position she can't run.

I actually have a book that talks about this. Here's the long version - It was a risk-benefit analysis. The USN wargamed it out. They determined destroyers are cheap ships that carry short range guns that aren't really a threat to larger ships. Torpedoes are the thing that makes them a threat to larger ships. Thus they found the explosion hazard posed by torpedoes is acceptable on cheap, disposable units in return for the significant firepower increase it provides. Cruisers are the reverse. They are expensive. The 8" guns on the cruisers they were building at the time (Pensacola class and Northampton class) significantly outraged torpedoes and fired faster and could take out ships without the explosion hazard of risky short-ranged torpedoes. For a cruiser to even use torps it had to get in ranges where cruiser guns were already deadly effective and this it was deemed to be suicidally risky. So it wasnt worth keeping them. Plus this freed up top weight for more valuable things like more AA and radars which provided more long-term benefit. Torpedoes on cruisers and battleships were relics from pre-Dreadnought days when heavy guns were inaccurate and short-ranged. They were a way to inject extra firepower to supplement the guns. By WW1 when big guns demonstrated deadly effectiveness at longer ranges, there was no need to take the risk of volatile torpedoes on a valuable larger ship. Note, the exception to this was the Japanese. The type 93 (Long Lance) torpedo had crazy long ranges and could reach out to cruiser gun ranges. This encouraged the IJN to keep big torpedo batteries in its cruisers long after everyone else shrunk their torpedo batteries on cruisers or in the USN's case, eliminated them completely. That paid dividends in some critical battles but quite a few IJN cruisers were lost when their torpedo tubes were hit. In the long run it isn't clear whether it was worth it. Beyond the IJN though, very, very few cruisers with torps in WW2 ever got to use them because of the suicidally close ranges. I think Sheffield torpedoed Bismarck and Rodney may have as well, but those were only possible because the ship was already crippled. They may have helped in Guadalcanal, but it's even more likely they would have detonated and nade the damage the cruisers took even worse. Atlanta and Juneau still had torpedoes and they didn't do either of them any good there. That's the actual long version of why the USN stopped putting them on cruisers. Lol

Could be. Atlantico has almost no superstructure though and Siegfried's damage output isnt very good. That's why I wish we had a video. Unless it gets its torp hits in, which the op didn't mention, a duel between Atlantico and Siegfried shouldnt end well for Siegfried with all other things being equal.

There's nothing physically stopping them but they aren't putting CVs on odd tiers anymore. She'd remain where she was, on T6. I think it's more likely we'd see Wasp as a premium USN T6 cv than a second Independence. We also might see an Independence class show up when the French CV line appears since they had one. I believe USS Belleau Wood became Bois Belleau in the French navy.

Most likely we'll see T6 Independence return when they decide how to reintroduce the old odd level CVs.

Like others have said, a video would help us to understand what the issue was. There's nothing about Siegfried that would cause a BB to do "next to nothing" to it on its broadside. It's tougher than most supercruisers, but it isn't that tough. Not by a Longshot. There's also nothing magic about its guns. She doesn't overmatch Atlantico, and she is one if the lowest dps cruisers on her tier so she couldnt have been smothering you with volume of damage either. Without video it's not clear to me how you were having so much trouble with her. It's basically a Gneisenau with weaker armor cosplaying as a cruiser.

Atago is far more effective and useful. It is a better damage producer, with better guns and better torpedoes. Neither have great AA, but Atago also gets an ASW plane while Tone doesn't and is largely screwed against subs. The only advantage Tone has is the utility of its TBs, but the recharge is quite slow (well over 2 min ) and they are the same planes that Ise has on T6 so they are very fragile and don't hit that hard on T8. I like Tone, but hands down Atago is the more effective ship. It really isn't close.

I agree with the DM or Salem recommendation. Heavy shells high ROF and improved autobounce is a win.

Yes. It's as strong as it always was.

The other big problem they are basically immune to damage even after they drop, so you really have no window where you can actually kill them. This also makes fighters completely useless, as opposed to mostly useless.

Poor design is not the same as bias. They definitely are a case of poor or at least questionable design. You're making an assumption that the poor design was caused by bias rather than just poor choices.

I doubt it,for the same reasons I doubt we'll have PT boats. As others have said, they dont add anything DDs don't already do. In fact l, hustorically, most of those smaller ship types were just cheaper ways to perform DD roles. I don't think we'll ever see mines because they just give a reason for static play. Very few people want that.