Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


Community Reputation

192 Valued poster

About icyplanetnhc

  • Rank
    Master Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

1,104 profile views
  1. icyplanetnhc

    Inaccurate AA information in the official wiki

    Interesting resource, thank you. Actually, now I remember that I have a gamemodels3d account. Regardless, it would be nice if the staff can actually update the wiki.
  2. It appears that the official game wiki is still using the AA system from before patch 0.8.0 and does not reflect the current AA values found in-game. Nor does it have sector information. Does the current wiki not support the revamped AA system yet? It makes precise AA comparisons especially between ships of different types (i.e. a destroyer and a battleship) difficult.
  3. icyplanetnhc

    Iowa build for ranked?

    I shouldn’t have to spend money, especially not for ships that I would have no experience in.
  4. icyplanetnhc

    Iowa build for ranked?

    I'm not so sure about that. Unlike the previous Tier 9 season, the game mode this season is Domination, which isn't quite as favorable towards destroyers. I would rather use a ship that I have a fair mount of experience in, instead of spending credits or free XP on something that I have no prior matches in.
  5. icyplanetnhc

    Iowa build for ranked?

    I don't have a Tier 9 destroyer yet...
  6. icyplanetnhc

    Iowa build for ranked?

    With the upcoming ranked season at Tier 9, I'm wondering what the optimal build for the Iowa is, as its my only ship at this tier. Currently, I have a fairly standard concealment and survivability build (with William Halsey), with Priority Target, Expert Marksman, Adrenaline Rush, Superintendent, Basics of Survivability, Fire Prevention, and Concealment Expert. Obviously I'm also using the Concealment Systems Mod in slot 5 and Artillery Plotting Room Mod in slot 6. However, I'm wondering if it's worthwhile to sacrifice Basics of Survivability for Expert Loader. With Halsey's improved skill, ammunition switch is possible in 7.5 seconds or less (with Adrenaline Rush).
  7. The Iowa is among the oldest ship models in the game. With the developers updating the models of older ships such as the Yamato's, I think an Iowa model update should incorporate changes in order to distinguish her as the actual USS Iowa of 1945/1946, as there are several visual differences between her and the rest of the ships of her class. As for why I chose Iowa in particular, the in-game model of the traverse bulkhead is 287 mm, which correspond to the thickness on Iowa and New Jersey rather than 368 mm on Missouri and Wisconsin. Furthermore, New Jersey herself has some unique differences in her bridge in 1944 (compare with the square bridge that all ships of the class eventually got) that I think would be better served if we see the actual ship in-game. Same with Wisconsin. The first would be the vertical windbreaker "fins" at the 08 level in the platform that extends in front of the main mast. These fins were only present on Iowa and were not on any of her sisters. In-game, this is modeled in Iowa's A hull, not but in the B or C hull. Furthermore, the shape of the uppermost platform at the 011 level on the fire control tower is different for Iowa/New Jersey and Missouri/Wisconsin. You can see this in a picture where Iowa (right) and Missouri (left) were sailing side-by-side in 1945. The second notable difference would be that unlike her sisters, Iowa had three 20 mm Oerlikons on her #2 turret compared to the quad 40 mm Bofors mount in that position for New Jersey, Missouri, and Wisconsin. The reason for this is that Iowa's bridge and conning tower has window slits at the lower level for flagship duties, and the 20 mm Oerlikons are low enough to not obstruct forward vision from this lower level. Moving more towards the aft of the ship, the arrangement of the signal platforms and Mk.51 director platforms on the Iowa is slightly different from Missouri, as seen in the following pictures. Furthermore, the rear mast has several antennas currently not modeled. Additionally, by 1945, Iowa's Mk.37 directors should have the Mk.22 radar (nicknamed "orange peel") mounted alongside the Mk.12; the Mk.22 is modeled on Montana's Mk.37 directors but currently not on Iowa's. The shape of the quad 40 mm Bofors gun tub on the #3 turret also differs slightly between Iowa and Missouri. Then there are some differences in the piping on the main fire control tower, as well as cosmetic differences between the aft fire control tower. Compare the pictures of Iowa (top) and Missouri (bottom) below. As a further note, by the time Iowa got the parabolic SK-2 in 1946, she has been stripped of all of her 20 mm Oerlikons, but for the purposes of gameplay I think she should retain them even if she is still modeled with that antenna rather than the square SK antenna that she had in 1945. See her 1946 configuration below. Finally, as a side note, I think the A hull (and the B and C hulls, even if it's a bit historically inaccurate) should get Iowa's actual Measure 32 camouflage that she wore in 1944. Currently, her permanent camouflage is that of Missouri; images of Iowa's actual Measure 32/1B is below. Final nitpick, both Iowa and Missouri models are missing the small central skeg under the #3 turret. Admittedly, this is a minor detail that you don't notice unless the ship capsizes, but both North Carolina and Montana are correctly modeled with this skeg. It serves to help support the weight of the turret structure.
  8. From what I understand, the game scales up the models by a factor of two, while time is “compressed” by a factor of ~5 for ship speed and shell ballistics in order to create a faster-paced experience.
  9. Ship speeds in-game are proportional via time compression. A 30 knot ship in-game is faster than a 20 knot ship by the same ratio as in real life.
  10. Developers have already acknowledged the error on Reddit and are looking into it.
  11. The ship should be balanced around its correct armor thicknesses. Frankly, given that nearly every ship has its belt armor thicknesses modeled accurately, Scharnhorst’s error actually “breaks” the rule.
  12. One would think that someone who cares about the Scharnhorst would want the ship to be modeled as accurately as possible within the confines of the game. Given that the game almost always uses the historical armor belt thickness values, there is frankly no reason to be opposed to this.
  13. icyplanetnhc

    Pugliese Revisited

    Interestingly enough, documentation and INRO articles by Mr. Bill Jurens and Strafford Morss refers to the South Dakota and Iowa torpedo protection system as internal "bulges". Iowa's system has an additional notable difference from the South Dakota's. The longitudinal spacing of the traverse bulkheads at the machinery spaces is tighter on the Iowas at ~32 ft compared to South Dakota's ~50 ft. This was the result of New York Navy Yard (it was customary for the lead shipyard to finish the detail design of the class) doubling the subdivision of the machinery spaces from 4 to 8 compartments. Anyways, this is significant because a common failure location of bulkheads is at the edges, and the denser spacing will no doubt be beneficial. I think another way to interpret how volume affects machinery is not so much the power, but the arrangement or design. For instance, the machinery spaces could be made shorter if the torpedo protection system didn't use up so much beam.
  14. icyplanetnhc

    What would constitute as "damage farming"?

    How are you defining "playing the objective"? That definition will vary between classes. For instance, a major aspect of playing the objective in destroyers is to scout, screen, and contest the caps. Battleships lack the maneuverability and concealment to scout and directly cap, so their role for playing the objective more often involves using their firepower to ward off enemy ships and absorbing enemy damage to protect the team's smaller ships. It can also involve delaying or stopping a push from the enemy team. By the virtue of their role, a battleship will tend to inflict more damage than other classes barring aircraft carriers. Simply inflicting more damage in and of itself isn't "damage farming", and labeling the battleships as a class of inherent "damage farmers" is not an accurate characterization.
  15. icyplanetnhc

    New Midway Movie to Start Filming

    This right here is a textbook example of Whataboutism. We're talking about the context and setting of World War 2, not antebellum America 80 years prior, or the Spanish-American War 40 years prior. Within the context of World War 2, the Japanese were by far the greater atrocity perpetrators; when comparing the casualties inflicted by war crimes, the numbers aren't even close. If you insist on using the Philippines as an example, while the US is responsible for numerous atrocities and civilian deaths during its war and occupation, the subsequent invasion and occupation by the Japanese was considerably more brutal. Your attempt at constructing a moral equivalence is frankly absurd. By the way, I'm not seeing denials or excuses for American colonialism anywhere in this topic, so your straw man argument is quite frankly pathetic. I also find it amusing that you belittle others for their supposed lack of education in history, and yet you're the person who just last week claimed that Japan "wiped the floor with the Allies for a solid year" after Pearl Harbor, and then deleted that post once the sheer inaccuracy of that statement was dissected and exposed.