UssIowaSailor

I have not played WOW's since the CV rework. Every time I get an itch to come back to play all I have to do is log into the forums and the desire to come back is squashed within 5 minutes. I hope the deck apes are doing a good job keeping my mothballed fleet of 213 ships rust free and in good condition lol.

Please understand that I am not doubting you bu do you have a source? Everything I have ever read said the Fuso was attacked before Read Admiral Oldendorf's six battleships opened fire. Fuso was hit by torpedoes at 0300 from the DD USS Melvin and fell out of formation and capsized and sank at 0400. Admiral Oldendorf's battleships didn't open fire on the Yamishiro until 0353.

Minor correction, the Fuso was never engaged by the US Battleships. She was ambushed by US Destroyers and sunk by torpedoes.

If I am not mistaken the Kongo's started out life as Battle Cruisers but during the inter war period they were modernized, lengthened and had their armor package brought up to Battleship standards. So they came out of the Yards as a Fast Battleship, not a Battle cruiser.

You are either trolling or just a moron, hard to tell the difference. Kirishima took 20 16 inch hits and 17 secondary battery hits. That damage caused a 17 degree list that could not be corrected and the Kirashima sank because of said damage. She was not scuttled or torpedoed from friendly ships, she sank as a direct result of battle with another Battleship. Yamishiro took 12 hits from the West Virginia and it is unknown how many hits she took from the other five battleships. She may have taken a torpedo hit from US Destroyers but it was the West Virginia that did the damage. Lastly the Scharnhorst was in fact sunk in battle by the Duke of York. I know you said "Scharnhorst was a battle Cruiser, end of story." She was a battle cruiser, according to whom? A low IQ individual like you? You obviously do not have the intellect to even comprehend what the differences between a battleship and a battle cruiser was so silly proclamations from you carry no weight. The Scharnhorst class did not fit the criteria of a battle cruiser in ANY sense and claiming that they were only highlights your low intelligence.

Respectfully I disagree with your interpretation for a few reasons. First the Scharnhorst class were designed to fit within the Anglo-German Naval Agreement where the Bismarck class totally ignored the treaty. You say it carried a lighter armor compliment to the Bismarck but so did EVERY other battleship ever built. The Bismarck had the highest percentage of her tonnage committed to armor of any battleship ever built. When you compare her armor to ships like the North Carolina class her Armor package was superior.

I saw Sub footage in YouTube and ASW is HORRIFIC, fully automated and is a chase the circle mini game. Why would DD's even bother with that nonsense.

As you know I have not played since the CV relaunch but I look for you on discord all the time but I never see you on. If you were so inclined and were playing one weekend I might jump back in and run some game. For me the friends I make online and the people I play with are far more important to if I play a game or not. I will play a bad game with good people because having fun on discord trumps the solo game experience.

Bla bla bla, again your ignorance shows. Hood may have been called a battlecruiser but she was the largest warship in the world at the time of her sinking with belt armor equal to any Battleship. She would more accuratly be described as the worlds first Fast Battleship. There is ZERO evidence the Bismarck was scuttled so you don't have a leg to stand on there. The Kirishima capsized and sank due to damage received at the hands of the Washington. Again your apparent lack of IQ is showing the Scharnhorst does not fit into ANY definition of a battlecruiser. She was designed to carry the same 15-inch guns as the Bismarck but technical issues with the turrets saw the Germans mount 11-inch triple gun turrets as placeholder armament until the bugs in the 15-inch turrets could be worked out. Gneisenau was in the yards being regunned to the 15 inch twin turrets when she was damaged beyond repair by British bombers. She was also one of the best-protected battleships ever built in the 35k ton class. To say she was a battlecruiser only exposed you as a low IQ moron who doesn't know anything about Naval history. Yamishiro was hit by Torpedoes but she was also pummeled by the West Virginia and the five other US Standard type battleships. It is unknown what sunk her and she would have been sunk by the US battleships reguardless so the credit is theirs. In addition to battleship vs battleship, combat Battleships served important duty in convoy escort protecting merchant convoys from surface commerce raiders. They also provided invaluable gunfire support at every major land invasion during the war. I will agree that submarines were a more important weapon for the USN during the war, without them, the war would have dragged on for years. As strategic weapons they were just as important in the Pacific as the massive allied bombing campaign against Germany was in the disruption of the war effort. I would even say that Battleships were a huge waste of money and resources for the nations building them. That still does not change the fact that submarines were not part of the battle fleet and were not capable of taking part in Naval battles. The warships they did manage to sink were pure blind luck encounters where an enemy warship just happened to stumble across an enemy submarine.

The Bismarck sunk the Hood, The Rodney and King George the V sank the Bismarck. The Washington sank the Kirashima, and The West Virginia and five other battleships sank the Yamishiro. The Duke of York sank The Scharnhorst. The Massachusetts mauled the Jean Bart. Thank you for illustrating my point EXACTLY.

I guess you do not understand the difference between tactical and strategic. Submarines were used almost exclusively in the strategic capacity on both sides. Employed in the commerce raiding role to choke off the enemy supplies and hurt the war effort. If you think Battleships only protected carriers than you are simply ignorant of history and need to spend more time reading books than posting on these forums.

The problem I see is that NOBODY will be satisfied with Subs and everyone will complain about it. For the people playing subs they will not be satisfied with anything less than a Nuclear Powered Fast Attack Submarine. WW2 subs are just to slow on both the surface and underwater to fit into the fast paced arcade style shooter Wargaming seems to want. The surface fleet will be screaming bloody murder when the invisible assassins with zero counter start sinking their ships. Subs were a strategic weapon not a tactical one, trying to implement them into a tactical Naval war game seems dubious at best.

CRIMINAL.....how have you been brother, are you still playing ships?

Than throw in the ridiculous IFHE mechanics. Ships with 32mm ob bow plating can auto bounce a 406mm 2700 pound AP projectile, a projectile DESIGNED to punch through armor and yet a 127mm 55 pound high explosive shell can somehow mysteriously penetrate the armor. The problem is Wargaming does not care about representing historical Naval Combat, all they care about are introducing new gimmicks to the game to get the whales to hand over their money until the next gimmick is released and the cycle starts all over again.

No you won't, I quit back when the CV relaunch happened, that was how many months ago? I was a whale, had almost every premium ever released but Wargaming made the game unfun and unengaging and they are not getting my 100-300 a month in support.