Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'italian'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Volunteer Programs
  • Feedback and Support
    • Game Support and Bug Reporting
    • Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Discord


Twitter


Website URL


Instagram


YouTube


Twitch


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 28 results

  1. Hammer_n_Sickle

    Legion camo for... LEONE???

    Sooo I was looking at the offers and to my surprise noticed that Big Italian Bundle gives you LEGION camo for LEONE? Huh? That is the only place I see this info... and there isn't even a picture anywhere of what it would look like (at least as far as I was able to find)? Seems like it's one of the "big features" of the bundle. *whether Leone or the camo or the bundle in general is worth it is a separate thing that is not part of my query* TY Anyone who has Leone, are you able to see it offered in Camos section? If so perhaps you can post a preview screenshot of it? @Hapa_Fodder Any info you can give or point to?
  2. Want to see how people have been doing with their Italian BBs. Love to see other people's great games in them My best game in what I lovingly like to call "the big F". Down to 1.5k health at one point, but my cooking ended up being superior
  3. The following is a review of Paolo Emilio, the tier IX Italian destroyer. Wargaming was kind enough to provide me access to this ship at no cost to me -- be aware: I did not have to pay for this. To the best of my knowledge, the statistics and performance discussed in this review are current as of patch 0.9.9. Please be aware that said performance may change in the future. Quick Summary: A torpedo destroyer hiding behind a gunship facade but her painfully long main-battery reload hamstrings her gunnery. She is wicked fast and comes with an Italian Exhaust Smoke Generator. Both traits allow her to suicide-charge targets with her short-ranged fish. PROS Massive health pool of 24,400hp. Very heavily armoured for a destroyer including a 60mm belt. Huge SAP broadsides of up to 8,052 damage per salvo. Powerful torpedo armament with twelve tubes and 23,767 damage per fish. Base top speed of 43.5 knots. Engine Boost consumable provides a 25% speed increase giving her a maximum speed (with flag) of up to 56.7 knots in sprints (!) Has access to an Exhaust Smoke Generator. CONS Painfully long main battery reload of 10.7 seconds. Horrible fire-starter. No AP shells at all which makes generating citadel hits nigh-impossible. Torpedoes are very short ranged at 6km. Enormous turning radius of 810m. Horrible concealment values. Engine Boost only lasts for 50 seconds. Paolo Emilio is a very hungry ship when it comes to commander skills & upgrades. You will not have enough points and slots to go around. Overview Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / CHALLENGING / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / HIGH/ Extreme New players stay away. Paolo Emilio is not an easy ship to play. The challenge resides in her poor concealment, her weird gunnery and short-ranged fish. While suicide-torping in PVE-modes will certainly pay dividends, this all falls apart against human opponents. Paolo Emilio's modest gunnery damage out-put, her lack of stealth and her painfully short-duration consumables makes heads-up encounters against just about any opponent super-dangerous. If you cannot kill them quickly, you're not likely to escape. Options Consumables Paolo Emilio's consumables are weird. Whether or not this ends up being normal if and when the Italian destroyer line launches remains to be seen. At least her Damage Control Party is standard for a destroyer. This has unlimited charges, a 5 second active period and a 40 second reset timer. She uses an Exhaust Smoke Generator in her second slot. This generates smoke for 35 seconds (40.25s with X-ray Papa Unaone signal) and will conceal Paolo Emilio for this duration even while she moves at full speed. Each cloud dissipates in 10 seconds. She starts with five charges (which is admittedly a lot!) and they have a 140 second reset timer. Finally, she has a weird Engine Boost consumable. The candle that burns twice as bright burns for half as long. Paolo Emilio's boost provides a 25% increase to her speed instead of the usual 8% for most destroyers. However, it only lasts for 50 seconds instead of the typical 120 seconds. She starts with five charges here as well (which, again, is a lot) and it shares the 140 second reset timer of her Exhaust Smoke Generator. Pay special attention to the synergy between her Engine Boost and Exhaust Smoke Generator's reset timers. They very conveniently line up and almost match her torpedo reload time. Upgrades There are, ostensibly, two ways of specializing Paolo Emilio. The first is a more conventional destroyer gunship build, focusing upon stealth, damage output and making use of stationary bits of cover. The latter favours an open-water style of engagement, firing at range and focusing upon agility at the expense of stealth. Obviously there's a lot of overlap between these two so you can mix and match to suit your style. You'll note that I'm not fussing overmuch about upgrading her torpedoes. They honestly don't need any help. Main Armaments Modification 1 is optimal in your first slot. Though if you really hate detonations and are running low on Juliet Charlie signals, Magazine Modification 1 isn't a terrible choice. In slot two, Engine Boost Modification 1 is a must if you can afford it. This costs 17,000 from the Armory and is well worth the price. This increases the action time of her Engine Boost from 50 seconds to 70 65 seconds which is a lot more comfortable. If you can't afford this then default to Engine Room Protection as you would for most destroyers. In her third slot, Aiming Systems Modification 1 is optimal. However, Paolo Emilio's gun handling could use a little help when she's bobbing and weaving in open water. Main Battery Modification 2 can help keep her guns on target when you're zooming past a target at high speed (especially given the current bug with the Expert Marksman skill). There is an argument to be made for Torpedo Tubes Modification 1 in slot three, not so much for the gains in torpedo speed, but for keeping her torpedo launchers alive and speeding up their traverse rate. Knowing what I know about critical damage and destruction mechanics, I'm not sold on this upgrade. Aiming System Modification 1 is hands down better, in my opinion, even if its gains are similarly minimal. For your fourth slot, it's really up to you. Propulsion Modification 1 provides the biggest boost to how your ship performs but only from a dead stop. Your ship has to be stationary (and stationary often) for this to be worthwhile. If you prefer an island or allied-smoke camping style of play, this is the one to grab. Otherwise, default to Steering Gears Modification 1 to drop her rudder shift time down from 5.3s to 4.2s. So, Concealment Modification 1 is always going to be optimal for slot five. The combination of increased stealth and increased gunnery dispersion from enemy ships is too good to pass up. Still, if you would prefer a more active style of play, you can opt for Steering Gears Modification 2. On it's own it drops Paolo Emilio's rudder shift time from 5.3s to 3.2s. If you pair it with Steering Gears Modification 1 from the previous slot, you can get this all the way down to 2.5s. Finally, we have a game play choice. Main Battery Modification 3 is definitely the front-runner. This reduces her gunnery reload time from a painful 10.7s to 9.4s. Pair it with Basic Fire Training and you can get this down to 8.5s, which is still awful but not abhorrent. This comes at the expense of her gun rotation rate which drops from 10º/s to 8.7º/s. That's not enough to allow her to out-turn her turrets, but it's still uncomfortably close. The alternative is grabbing Gun Fire Control System Modification 2 to increase her range from 11.3km to 13.11km which definitely helps with the open-water gunship style of play. Paired with Advanced Fire Training, you can get her range up to 15.73km. So more pew-pews or more comfortable, long-range gunnery. It's up to you. So for a super-specialized, open-water build, you might go for: MAM1, EBM1, ASM1, SGM1, SGM2, GFCM1 with the option of swapping out SGM2 for CSM1 based on preferences. But a more generic build might look like: MAM1, EBM1, ASM1, PM1, CSM1, MBM3. Commander Skills There's a lot to unpack here. Lemme explain what all of the shapes and colour coding mean: Blue circles: Pick ONE. (1pt) Red circles: Always take these. (5pts combined) Red squares (double outline): Highly recommended. (8pts combined) Yellow squares: Great if you can afford them, but lower-priority than red-squares. (14pts combined) Blue squares: Nice to have but not optimal in most builds. (10pts combined) So just touching base on the necessities and the highly-recommended stuff, you're looking at 14pts spent so it gets pretty messy to fill out the last five points. I never found a build that I was 100% happy with while play-testing Paolo Emilio. I go into more detail about the conflicts and struggles here in the Firepower section below. Camouflage Paolo Emilio comes with Type 10 Camouflage providing the usual tier IX premium-ship bonuses of: -3% surface detection +4% increased dispersion of enemy shells. -20% to post-battle service costs. +100% to experience gains. Italian ships are just plain gorgeous. Firepower Main Battery: Eight 135mm guns in 4x2 turrets in an A-B-X-Y superfiring configuration Torpedoes: Twelve torpedo tubes in 3x4 launchers with one wing mount to either side between the funnels and one mounted centerline behind the second funnel giving her up to an eight-fish broadside. With few exceptions, firepower defines a ship's performance. Paolo Emilio presents a rather extreme example in this instance, dictating (or at least pressuring players towards) a particular play style. Despite her apparent heavy gun armament, she is not a gunship. She is a torpedo-destroyer. Relying upon her main battery weapons to carry the day makes about as much sense here as it would on ships like Kagero, Benham or Fujin. While occasional successes may come at the hands of a well placed main-battery broadside, it is capitalizing upon her torpedo armament which makes or breaks this ship. Let's go into the wherefores. Limited by a Long Reload There are two primary drawbacks to Paolo Emilio's main battery firepower: She has no access to AP shells. She has a painfully long reload. The former is, honestly, only a minor issue. Paolo Emilio's lack of AP shells is really only a factor when it comes to engaging cruisers and aircraft carriers at point-blank ranges where, theoretically, whatever AP shells she might have had would be capable of landing citadel hits. In all other engagement ranges and types, her SAP shells provide superior performance. So, like I said: Paolo Emilio's lack of AP is a drawback but it's so minor that it's no real loss. Her slow reload time, however, is another matter entirely. Paolo Emilio's guns are bloody brilliant aside from her rate of fire. Check out these strengths: 23mm of HE penetration (28mm with IFHE). With the right skill build, her 135mm shells are capable of directly damaging the extremities of any cruiser she comes across. 38mm of SAP penetration. This is enough to directly damage all battleship extremities and the upper hulls of those snooty American battleships. Massive 8,052 damage SAP broadside. The alpha strike from her SAP shells is capable of shredding between a third and half of a destroyer's hit point pool in a single salvo if all eight shells strike it amidships. Excellent forward fire angles. All eight guns can engage targets 27º off the ship's bow. All of this gets matched with decent gun handling, a good fire chance per shell, decent range, and reasonable HE shell damage. But no matter how good all of these traits are, being shackled to a 10.7 second reload makes her guns junky. Their only saving grace thus becomes that alpha strike off her SAP shells so let's talk more about them. Paolo Emilio's main battery damage output is pretty crappy. In theory, her SAP is pretty formidable, however you cannot count on your opponent giving you enough of a broadside for it to work. She cannot win protracted gunnery duels against most other destroyers. Crappy Sappy SAP performance is all over the map. While they all have high-alpha damage per shell, they do have drawbacks -- namely their propensity to ricochet when striking targets at acute angles. "Good" SAP shells have very forgiving ricochet angles while "bad" SAP shells have scarcely better ricochet angles than AP shells. Because I'm thorough (and stupid), I collected all of the SAP ricochet angles so we could better evaluate Paolo Emilio's SAP rounds: 80º to 85º - Nino Bixio, the tier II Italian tech-tree cruiser. 70º to 80º - The tier II through X tech-tree cruisers with SAP including the premiums Genova & Gorizia. 70º to 80º - Impero, the tier VIII Italian battleship premium that didn't make it out of testing. 60º to 75º - Paolo Emilio With the ricochet angles mapped out, it looks like this: Paolo Emilio's SAP shells are a LOT less reliable than other SAP shells with which you may be familiar. They are far more prone to ricochets. When it comes to ricochets, Paolo Emilio's SAP shells are like very forgiving AP rounds rather than SAP from Italian cruisers. Once an enemy ship (particularly a destroyer) appears to be turning towards or away from you, it's time to switch over to HE rounds. Given her slow rate of fire, this normally only allows for two salvos to be fired off before an enemy has angled enough to make her SAP rounds unable to sustain damage. This is, of course, barring obliviousness, but any weapon can appear amazing if the enemy doesn't fight back. Thus Paolo Emilio's SAP rounds perform best against distracted targets or in ambush situations and there's a lot of mileage for taking skills like Expert Loader to fully capitalize on on SAP opportunities. When to Use Guns Like Japanese destroyers, Paolo Emilio's guns should be used opportunistically but carefully. Every pull of the trigger should be calculated. While it does pay dividends to invest in improving Paolo Emilio's gun performance for those lean spells where you can't make use of her fish, it would be a mistake to think that her guns alone can consistently carry a match. Ideally, when you do elect to do some gunnery, you want to be using SAP as much as possible. You can largely forget about setting fires with Paolo Emilio's HE rounds. While she does have a respectable fire chance per shell, her slow rate of fire will make taxing a battleship's Damage Control Party exceedingly difficult. Getting more than a single blaze to stack, never mind two, will require some hefty bribery to RNGeebus. To this end, taking Inertial Fuse for HE Shells isn't a terrible option to boost the direct damage performance of her HE rounds, but I'm generally of the opinion that this is way too expensive for what is very much a secondary ammunition choice on an already secondary weapon system. You can play Paolo Emilio as an open water or island-camping gunship. Hell, you can go for a full Khabarovsk or French Destroyer style build and play up the harassment meta all game. Increase her range through Advanced Fire Training or an upgrade and shoot and scoot to your heart's content. But that's not what she was designed for and it's again going to set you back a whole lot of skill points. Missile Command's MIRVs What Paolo Emilio is designed for, is drive-by deposits of torpedo broadsides at point-blank ranges. On paper, the setup is dirt simple: Use her ridiculous high-speed provided by her Engine Boost consumable to race directly towards a vulnerable target. Activate her Exhaust Smoke Generator just before you reach your own surface detection range in order to stay unspotted. Sprint the remaining distance and dump two launchers worth of torpedoes into the exposed broadside of your hapless enemy. With each fish dealing upwards of 23,766 damage per hit, any target you select is doomed. From the enemy's perspective, all they see is an aggressive moving smoke cloud that suddenly explodes into salvos of torpedoes. If Paolo Emilio is on the enemy team, you have to treat these incoming smoke clouds like one big torpedo that's about to MIRV into separate warheads. In PVE modes, this works as exactly as Wargaming designed. In PVP, it's a much less certain prospect. Paolo Emilio has some pretty gorgeous fire arcs and a couple of meh. It's only her dorsal torpedo launcher with it's forward fire arc that's crappy. The reason is pretty simple: Paolo Emilio's torpedoes, as formidable as they are, are very short ranged. To be clear, they hit like trucks and they're super fast (23,677 damage and 67 knots respectively). However, with only a 6km range, you're only getting hits with them if one of two conditions re met: Make a 200 IQ play at an aggressively moving enemy that doesn't know you're there, ambushing either through the slimmest margins of open-water stealth-torping or using island cover. Play as Wargaming designed her, and make a mad dash at an exposed enemy, using consumables to close the distance. I stress that the enemy must be exposed. An opponent that knows you're coming and takes steps to avoid your fish may not escape damage entirely but they're not going to get sunk. And then you've got nothing but your crappy, slow firing guns to see you out of trouble with a very angry enemy spotting you for not only their own weapons but those of all of their friends. Failing one of these Paolo Emili-yolos will cost you most, if not all of your health. So the counter is pretty basic. Activate Hydroacoustic Search or Surveillance Radar if you have it and point your butt and guns at the cloud, moving directly away from it at speed. You might take a torpedo hit or two in battleships but anything else should avoid the worst of it. This active counter-play means that Paolo Emilio is not a forgiving destroyer to play. There are more counters than this, of course. An ill-timed, broken module can similarly flub one of these attack runs, be it Paolo Emilio's engines or one of her torpedo launchers. The long reload of her fish in conjunction with the necessity of timing her consumables means that in PVP, you have to pick your targets and your moment of attack carefully or you'll just end up a greasy stain on the ocean's surface. If this ship becomes commonplace in the community (and I doubt it given the resources needed to unlock her), you can expect to see not only a lot of failed attacks but attacks that do nothing more than sink someone that was already over-exposed anyway and the Paolo Emilio that landed the killing blow dies in the attempt. So, despite the obvious memes, success with Paolo Emilio's torpedoes has a lot of skill-based elements to it -- at least outside of PVE. So some caveats apply here. These numbers are before you account for fire resistance of a given target which, at high tiers, is close to 50%. So, generally speaking, if you want to know how many fires per minute you can expect, take the numbers here, halve them and then compare them to your gunnery accuracy in the respective ship. So if you're hitting about 60% of the time in your Tashkent and you've fully spec'd her out to burninate, you can expect to set about three fires every sixty seconds against a Yamato. Also, Friesland still has zero chill. Summary There's surprising depth to Paolo Emilio's weapon systems. For example, her guns are terrible but if you build them properly, they become dangerous enough to pull out some wins in select encounters. You can brainlessly YOLO with her torpedoes but to get more than one success in three games, you have to plan your attacks carefully. I'm reminded a lot of Haida's weapon systems -- not in that their performance is comparable, but more that while it takes a lot of work to get results, said results feel earned. Paolo Emilio's weapons are very satisfying. VERDICT: A few crippling flaws but there's some fearsome potential here both with her torpedoes and her guns. Defense Hit Points: 24,400 Min Bow & Deck Armour: 19mm & 20mm respectively Paolo Emilio is what the kids like to call "a heckin' chonker." She has 24,400 base hit points and 27,550hp with Survivability Expert (and you will take Survivability Expert). While she does not have any healing capacity, the sheer bulk of hit points provides effectively more health than some of those tier IX destroyers that do have heals due to the inefficiency of getting the maximum potential from every single consumable charge. Now that's a lot of potential damage! With Survivability Expert, Paolo Emilio has comparable durability to Jutland, Udaloi and Östergötland given typical use of their Repair Parties. Getting the "Maximum Healing Potential" as listed on these graphs is a bit of a pipe dream. Part of the reason she's so hefty is that she's actually armoured! Khabarovsk and other high-tier Soviet destroyers show their Italian pedigree when you look at what Paolo Emilio is sporting here. She has belt armour. She has armoured turrets and barbettes. She actually has reinforced magazine protection and a turtleback to protect her machine spaces for crying out loud. You could be forgiven for mistaking her for a very light cruiser. The practical effect here is that not every shell fired at Paolo Emilio will do damage. HE shells aimed at her amidships hull have a very good chance of shattering against her 60mm plates which is proof against HE shells of up to 360mm (240mm if they have 1/4 HE penetration). In addition, British 113mm guns from destroyers like Jutland and Daring cannot penetrate her deck without IFHE, further increasing the effectiveness of her steel. AP shells of all calibers will ricochet off her belt at acute angles. Combined with her enormous hit point pool, Paolo Emilio feels tougher than her destroyer-status would otherwise suggest. If she had the DPM to compete, out-trading with Paolo Emilio would be downright overpowered with this build. As it is, her toughness can kinda-sorta bail her out of tough situations and protracted duels, but she doesn't fare well in trades. The best use of this durability is at range, using her speed smokes to perform short-term hit and runs and then disengage and reposition. Being so tough will reduce the impact of those incidental hits and short-term exchanges. But don't think for a second that this will allow you to survive failed YOLO-torpedo charges. Paolo Emilio has a multitude of hidden armour geometries that are more curious than practical. If anything, they may end up being more of a drawback, ensuring that small and medium caliber AP shells fuse properly inside her. I did not include the 20mm turtleback (angled approximately 50º to 60º from the vertical) which connects the 60mm belt to the main deck as it would get lost in the clutter of her 20mm deck. Graphic was pulled from assets from gamemodels3d.com, a great site for advanced users that are interested in a more detailed look at the mechanics of World of Warships. VERDICT: Tough enough to surprise opponents but not so tough that she survives over-extending. Agility Top Speed: 43.5 knots Port Turning Radius: 810m Rudder Shift Time: 5.3s 4/4 Engine Speed Rotation Rate: 7º/s Paolo Emilio is stupid fast and that solves a lot of potential problems with this ship. She has the speed to dictate engagement ranges. She can pick her fights. Her high speed helps make up for her horrid turning circle radius, providing a modest rate of turn instead of an abysmal one. If all she had was this 43.5 knot top speed, that would be remarkable enough unto itself, but she also has access to an improved Engine Boost consumable. Paolo Emilio's ridiculous high speed helps counteract her horrible turning radius, giving her a still reasonable (but still admittedly slow) rate of turn. Her Engine Boost consumable is simultaneously awesome and crappy. It provides a 25% boost to her speed instead of 8%, which is awesome. But it lasts 50s instead of 120s which is such a tease. Just as you're finally ticking over those last few tenths of a knot to reach her theoretical maximum of 56.7kts (with a Sierra Mike signal), the damn thing cuts out. Taking the special upgrade, Engine Boost Modification 1 extends this up to 70 65 seconds, but it's still painfully short of what other versions of this consumable provide. This makes it less useful as a "navigate from A to B" consumable and more of one dedicated to Paolo Emilio's singular purpose: suicide torping. Her Engine Boost consumable synergizes well with her Exhaust Smoke Generator, encouraging their paired use. Activate her Engine Boost first to build up speed and then activate her Exhaust Smoke Generator just before you're spotted and lunge towards your selected target. This does not guarantee success, however. Even at her maximum boosted speed, Paolo Emilio does not have enough longevity in her Exhaust Smoke Generator to allow her to cover the entire distance between herself and a stationary target before the smoke cover expires (to say nothing of a target that's moving away). For those wondering, the distance compression in World of Warships is 5.22x. The purpose of these numbers is to illustrate how much range you can close when lunging after a target with Paolo Emilio. I covered her basic stats against stationary targets where the closing speed will be Paolo Emilio's speed at the time. However I also wanted to simulate approximately the closing distance when a target was either closing or moving away. To this end, I included entries where Paolo Emilio was racing after an enemy where she was outrunning them by 20 and 30 knots respectively. I also included the opposite end of the spectrum, where there is a target unwittingly charging towards Paolo Emilio and the combined closing speed amounts to 70 and 80 knots. The values are admittedly modest rather than a best / worst case scenario but should provide enough data to illustrate my points of caution. The actual relevant distance Paolo Emilio needs to close is 2km less than the values listed. Once you're in auto-detect range, it doesn't matter if her smoke is active or not. Similarly, if your target is going to oblige you by presenting the perfect torpedo target when you're still 4km out (such as by swinging out and presenting their broadside), then you need not run the full distance as your torpedoes can cover the remainder. Still, it pays to keep in mind just how long you'll need to push in order to guarantee those torpedo hits. This is a harrowing experience and every bit of speed you can squeeze out of Paolo Emilio's engines counts. This all comes back to Paolo Emilio having a pretty steep learning curve. What appears on the surface to be a straight forward calculation is far more nuanced. With this speed and decent agility, she should be an excellent kiting gunship if it weren't for that horrid reload. Suicide-torping should be easy if it weren't for the fact her consumables had such short active-periods. Worse, Co-Op won't help you learn these traits. Bots are dumb and they will make this ship's speed seem just right for pulling off shenanigans that will only get you killed against human opponents so you're not going to get any reasonable practice there. VERDICT: Damn-fast but not damn-fast for damn-well long enough. Anti-Aircraft Defense Flak Bursts: 2 for 1,540 damage per blast. Long Ranged (up to 4.6km): 52.5dps Short Ranged (up to 2.0km): 96.4dps Paolo Emilio's anti-aircraft damage numbers aren't terrible. They're downright respectable even. The issue here is that she doesn't have the range to give her guns enough time on target to do anything. She's a ready victim to dedicated air attack without the concealment to avoid being detected in the first place and lacking a long-lasting smoke screen to discourage CVs from loitering. While not quite on the level of French destroyer vulnerability, Paolo Emilio is a juicy and easy target for carriers. VERDICT: Yer dead. I did not shoot those Messerschmitts down. That was done by the combined firepower of the Baltimore and North Carolina behind me. Refrigerator Base/Minimum Surface Detection: 9.08km / 7.13km Base/Minimum Air Detection Range: 3.68km / 2.98km Detection Range When Firing in Smoke: 3.65km sea / 2.7km air Main Battery Firing Range: 11.3km to 15.73km with full upgrades. The last piece of the Paolo Emilio puzzle is her Vision Control (or "Refrigerator" as Lert coined it many years ago). Let's start with the obvious. Paolo Emilio's surface detection range is nothing short of appalling. To give you an idea, there are only five destroyers with worse surface detection ranges. They are: 10km - Khabarovsk, tier X Soviet 9.88km - Kléber, tier X French 9.54km - Mogador, tier IX French 9.40km - Tashkent, tier IX Soviet 9.20km - Udaloi, tier IX Soviet In most destroyer versus destroyer encounters, you are not sneaking up on your opponent. With the exception of those those five ships, you will always be spotted first. Taking Radio Location to help identify the vector of spotting destroyers is quite handy, albeit an expensive solution to this problem. Heads-up encounters with destroyers should largely be avoided given Paolo Emilio's poor gun damage output unless the target is exposed and/or crippled. Trust her speed to keep enemies at arm's length, but be aware that playing keep-away constantly will surrender map control and probably cost you the match. Similarly, using her speed to charge headlong into cap circles is a great way to get Paolo Emilio sunk so it's best to play more passively around objectives lest she have a ton of ready support. Next on the list is what she does not have: Namely any detection consumables. As the meta has progressed, Hydroacoustic Search has become more commonplace on high-tier destroyers. Surveillance Radar too has proliferated. This is doubly important to keep in mind when her Exhaust Smoke Generator is active as she is effectively flying blind during the 35 to 40 seconds that it's active. While battleships with active firing guns are easy to see through her smoke, smaller vessels are not. Speaking of her Exhaust Smoke Generator, it is painfully easy to forget how short-lived this consumable operates for. While the X-ray Papa Unaone signal helps immeasurably with its added fives seconds of emission, this still gives her a pittance when it comes to concealment time. Do not panic-blurt her smoke. Also: don't panic fire her guns while she's in smoke lest you light yourself for an enemy you didn't know was there. The reset timer on her smoke is still painfully long (two minutes and twenty seconds) and a premature blast of smoke inside of radar or hydro range will do her no favours. The same can be said if she's being hounded by aircraft or enemy lolibotes. Once the smoke clears, Paolo Emilio may still find herself in trouble. While her smoke is useful defensively, it's best to keep her out of such problem situations in the first place, preserving it for the suicide-rushes she was designed around. Paolo Emilio's vision control is pretty terrible all told. She's reliant on her speed to make up for it and as shown previously, she's not fast enough for long enough to correct all of these problems. Her Exhaust Smoke Generator is powerful, opening up the possibility of some nice offensive and defensive actions but it has its drawbacks too. It's too short lived and she flies blind while its operating. Her fortunes tend to reside on how well her smoke is utilized. VERDICT: Her success is dictated by how well you can use her smoke. Final Evaluation Wargaming designed Paolo Emilio to be a one trick pony. In their own words: Yet despite this, she ended up being delightfully more complex. She can run and gun. She can even play the role of a destroyer interceptor, trusting on her alpha strike and durability to outlast her opponent. She's not good at either of these roles, but she does demonstrate flexibility enough to pull these off in a pinch. They're just not something you should base her entire play around. It's easy to dismiss Paolo Emilio as nothing more than a YOLO-bote. But even in that role, pulling this off successfully isn't always simple. Well, outside of co-op, it isn't simple. Paolo Emilio is like one of the strongest co-op botes I've ever played. Wait in the wings for the enemy DDs to be taken out and then YOLO your way to 130,000+ damage easy as you slash through the enemy cruisers / battleships with her fish. As a crusty ol' veteran, I unduly appreciate complexity in ship performance. But therein lies the trap. Just because a ship is complex, that doesn't necessarily make it good. Paolo Emilio makes you jump through a few hoops to get her to perform even to a reasonable level (again in most PVP encounters -- PVE need not apply) but that's not necessarily a good thing for the average consumer. There are a lot of ways to counter a YOLO-rush from Paolo Emilio and running into these counters time and again can be discouraging. Do I think Paolo Emilio is worth it? Yeah, she's fun. I like her. I'm not sure she's so much fun that I'd go through the slog of regrinding through the Research Bureau over and over and over again. I'd do that for Siegfried but Paolo Emilio is a much harder sell that way. Now I say this without having enjoying much success in Paolo Emilio in PVP battles. My first forays into PVP with her were downright disastrous, if not comical. She really is not an easy ship to play but that, to me, is definitely part of her appeal. Like Haida, if you do well in Paolo Emilio, it's because you played well. Furthermore, it's not because you overcame an unfair set of difficulties either. I will say this: If Wargaming opens up a 1 vs 1 Ranked Battle season at tier IX, Paolo Emilio will be HILARIOUS. Paolo Emilio swatting simulator. Kill it quick before it MIRVs. Conclusion Can't talk. Wargaming released Florida without warning. Must review.
  4. Did someone forget them for naval battles?
  5. Totenliste

    Possible Italian DD line

    We really need to get some Italian DDs out there to fight the French Destroyers Note: I tried to avoid using another country's unmodified destroyer in this line up. [T2] Curtatone Class DD 1923 https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_dd_curtatone.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtatone-class_destroyer Type: Destroyer Displacement: · 953 t (standard) ·1214 t (full load) Length: 84.72 m (277 ft 11 in) Beam: 8 m (26 ft 3 in) Draught: 2.46 m (8 ft 1 in) Propulsion: ·2 shaft Zoelly steam turbines ·4 Thornycroft type boilers ·22,000 hp (16,400 kW) Speed: 32 knots (59 km/h; 37 mph) Range: 1,800 nmi (3,300 km) at 15 knots (28 km/h; 17 mph) Complement: 117 Armament: ·4 × 102 mm guns (2 × 2) ·2 × 76 mm AA guns (2 × 2) ·6 × 13.2 mm machine guns ·6 × 450 mm (18 in) torpedo tubes (2 × 3) ·16 mines [T3] Quinto Sella Class DD 1929 Refit https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_dd_sella.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sella-class_destroyer Type: Destroyer Displacement: ·1140 t (standard) ·1,457 t (full load) Length: 84.9 m (278 ft 7 in) Beam: 8.6 m (28 ft 3 in) Draught: 2.7 m (8 ft 10 in) Installed power: ·3 Thornycroft boilers ·36,000 shp (27,000 kW) Propulsion: 2 shafts; 2 geared steam turbines Speed: 33 knots (61 km/h; 38 mph) Range: 3,600 nmi (6,700 km; 4,100 mi) at 14 knots (26 km/h; 16 mph) Complement: 152 Armament: ·2 × twin 120 mm (4.7 in) guns ·2 × single 40 mm (1.6 in) AA guns ·2 × single 13.2 mm (0.52 in) machine guns ·2 × twin 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes ·32 mines [T4] Turbine Class DD 1927 https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_dd_turbine.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbine-class_destroyer Type: Destroyer Displacement: ·1,220 t (standard) ·1,670 t (full load) Length: 93.2 m (305 ft 9 in) Beam: 9.2 m (30 ft 2 in) Draught: 3 m (9 ft 10 in) Installed power: ·3 Thornycroft boilers ·40,000 shp (30,000 kW) Propulsion: 2 shafts; 2 geared steam turbines Speed: 33 knots (61 km/h; 38 mph) Range: 3,200 nmi (5,900 km; 3,700 mi) at 14 knots (26 km/h; 16 mph) Complement: 179 Armament: ·2 × twin 120 mm (4.7 in) guns ·2 × single 40 mm (1.6 in) AA guns ·4 × twin 13.2 mm (0.52 in) machine guns ·2 × triple 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes ·52 mines [T5] Soldati Class DD 1941-1942 Version (also known as Camicia Nera Class) https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_dd_soldati.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soldati-class_destroyer Type: Destroyer Displacement: · 1,830 t (standard) · 2,460 t (full load) Length: ·106.7 m (350 ft 1 in) (o/a) ·101.6 m (333 ft 4 in) (pp) Beam: 10.15 m (33 ft 4 in) Draught: 3.15–4.3 m (10 ft 4 in–14 ft 1 in) Installed power: ·3 Yarrow boilers ·48,000 shp (36,000 kW) Propulsion: 2 shafts; 2 geared steam turbines Speed: 33 - 35 knots Range: 2,200 nmi at 20 knots Complement: Electronics: 206 Sonar Armament: ·(2 × 2 + 1 x 1) 120 mm (4.7 in) guns ·(4 × 2) 20 mm AA guns ·2 × triple 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes ·2 × depth charge throwers ·48 mines [T6] Navigatori Class DD 1939-1940 Refit Version (Class built in answer to French Jaguar and Guépard classes) https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_dd_navigatori.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navigatori-class_destroyer Type: Destroyer Displacement: ·2,125 t (standard) ·2,888 t (full load) Length: 109.3 m Beam: 11.2 m Draught: 4.2 m Installed power: ·4 water-tube boilers ·50,000 hp Propulsion: 2 shafts; 2 geared steam turbines Speed: 33 – 35 knots Range: 3,800 nmi (7,000 km; 4,400 mi) at 18 knots (33 km/h; 21 mph) Complement: 222–225 (wartime) Armament: ·3 × twin 120 mm (4.7 in) guns ·2 × single 40 mm (1.6 in) AA guns ·8 × twin 13.2 mm (0.52 in) machine guns ·6 × 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes (2 x 3) ·86–104 mines ·2 DCT [T7] Comandanti Medaglie d'Oro Class DD 1942 (Group 1) https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_dd_comandanti.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comandanti_Medaglie_d'Oro-class_destroyer Type: Destroyer Displacement: · 2,067 t (standard) · 2,900 t (full load) Length: 120.7 m (396 ft) (o/a) Beam: 12.3 m (40 ft 4 in) Draught: 3.6 m (11 ft 10 in) Installed power: ·3 three-drum boilers ·60,000 shp (45,000 kW) Propulsion: 2 shafts; 2 geared steam turbines Speed: 35 - 38 knots Range: 3,300 nmi (6,100 km; 3,800 mi) at 20 knots (37 km/h; 23 mph) Complement: 272 Sensors and processing systems: EC-3 ter Gufo search radar Armament: ·4 × single 135 mm (5.3 in) guns ·12 × single 37 mm (1.5 in) AA guns ·2 × triple 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes ·52 mines ·2 depth charge throwers, 64 depth charges [T8] Spalato Class DD 1943 (Italian Armament and Machinery in French based Fantasque hull) https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_dd_spalato.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yugoslav_destroyer_Split Type: Large destroyer Displacement: · 2,040 t (Standard) · 2,500 t (full load) Length: ·120 m (393 ft 8 in) (o/a) ·114.8 m (376 ft 8 in) (p/p) Beam: 11.3 m (37 ft 1 in) Draft: 3.48 m (11 ft 5 in) Installed power: ·55,000 shp (41,000 kW) ·3 × Yarrow boilers Propulsion: 2 × shafts; 2 × geared steam turbines Speed: Crew: 36 - 38 knots 214 Armament: Electronics: ·5 × single 135 mm (5.3 in) guns ·10 × single 37 mm (1.5 in) AA guns ·4 × twin 20 mm AA guns ·2 x triple 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes ·40 mines ·2 depth charge throwers ·2 DCR Sonar, Radar Note this is the completed version that Italy was unable to complete as shortly after getting it launched they scuttled it. As completed by Yugoslavia 1958. Here is a project done by Tzoli called DD Design 1939 I have a feeling this captured hull might have been something similar. Just swap out the quad racks for triples. Also check out Tzoli's other ship projects that never were, they are exceptional. https://www.deviantart.com/tzoli/art/Italian-Destroyer-Design-1939-779653886 [T9] Commandante Botti Class DD (Variant twin mount version of Comandanti Medaglie d'Oro 2nd Group) https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_dd_comandanti.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comandanti_Medaglie_d'Oro-class_destroyer Type: Destroyer Displacement: · 2,067 t (standard) · 2,900 t (full load) Length: 120.7 m (396 ft) (o/a) Beam: 12.3 m (40 ft 4 in) Draught: 3.6 m (11 ft 10 in) Installed power: ·3 three-drum boilers ·60,000 shp (45,000 kW) Propulsion: 2 shafts; 2 geared steam turbines Speed: 36 - 38 knots Range: 3,300 nmi (6,100 km; 3,800 mi) at 20 knots (37 km/h; 23 mph) Complement: 272 Sensors and processing systems: Radar Armament: ·4 × double 135 mm (5.3 in) guns ·12 × single 37 mm (1.5 in) AA guns ·2 × triple 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes ·52 mines ·2 depth charge throwers, 64 depth charges [T10] Capitani Romani Class DD/CL 1943 (Built in response to French Fantasque and Mogador classes) [Slightly modified Paolo Emilio] https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_cr_regolo.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitani_Romani-class_cruiser Type: Destroyer/Light cruiser Displacement: ·3,987 t (standard) ·5,600 t (full load) Length: 142.2 m Beam: 14.4 m Draught: 6.4 m Installed power: ·4 water-tube boilers ·110,000 shp (82,000 kW) Propulsion: 2 shafts; 2 geared steam turbines Speed: 43 knots Range: 4,350 nmi (8,060 km; 5,010 mi) at 18 knots (33 km/h; 21 mph) Complement: 494 Sensors and processing systems: Sonar, Radar Armament: ·4 × twin 135 mm (5.3 in) DP guns ·6 × single 65 mm AA guns ·4 × sextuple 20 mm (0.8 in) AA guns ·2 × quadruple 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes ·114-136 × mines ·2 DCR (24) ·2 DCT Armour: ·Turrets: 6–20 mm (0.24–0.79 in) ·Conning tower: 15 mm (0.59 in) Having had the T VI-IX (especially the IX having Emilio there is difficult) done already doesn't leave a lot of wiggle room. Notes: Curtatone: brought a number of innovations, concerning armament structure and arrangement. Curtatone class ships became the first Italian destroyers with all armament placed at center line. For the first time in Europe 102mm guns were installed in twin mounts. Besides that, these ships received triple TTs instead of twin. Soldati: Most successful and numerous class of Italian destroyers. Navigatori: Ordered in 1926 as the answer to the new French Jaguar and Guépard classes. New features of "Navigatori" type became machinery arrangement in echelon, that theoretically raised battle immunity. Transition to new 120mm/50 guns became another important innovation on account of the higher firing rate of the new guns "Navigatori" with three twin mounts not only did not yield, but also exceeded previous Leone class DDs with their four twin mounts of the old model. Comandanti Medaglie d'Oro: In one of the design stages 135mm guns took places both in single and twin mounts (my Commandante Botti Class), but in an ultimate variant the preference had been decided to go with four single mounts. Obviously my Commandante Botti Class at T9 can be tinkered to fit in at this level using twin mounts. Capitani Romani: Light cruisers of the Capitani Romani class became the answer to the new French Fantasque and Mogador classes. The ships should have, eight 135mm guns in four turrets, six of the newest 65mm AA guns and 2 quadruple TTs. The latter had original "two-level" construction (two tubes in the level and two in the upper). Because of unavailability of 65mm AA guns it was necessary to replace them with the habitual twin 37mm MGs. Now with the Paolo Emilio having 20-mm L65 Breda machine guns in sextuple mounts it forces my version to have them too. My T10 version has the following differences: Modified as designed add back the intended 65mm guns swapping out the 37mm, change out double 20mm for sextuple 20mm, and add radar/sonar option also slightly larger (difference with Paolo Emilio slightly better AA and radar/sonar option vs + 1 additional 1 x 4 TorpTube). Overall most Italian destroyers are known for instability problems at high speeds especially since they did time trials unloaded for intimidation factor of speed over the French. Most ships using their stable speed compare well to their French counterparts as well as in armament. Special Gimmick: Exhaust smoke generator as seen on Paolo Emilio. Other items up to design team of course.
  6. Hello there! Welcome to a post where I decide to stop doing single ADLAs on ships and instead try my best at guessing what a tech-tree line might look like. Here's my proposal for the Italian Aircraft Carriers tech-tree line. Italian Regia Marina Aircraft Carriers Foreword The Italian Regia Marina was hampered in its efforts to have aircraft carriers and operational naval aviation due to the interference and political machinations of the Regia Aeronautica. The Regia Marina was well aware of the power of aircraft carriers and had proposed their construction and adoption into the fleet from the early 1910s and kept fighting for their construction until the end of the Second World War. Mussolini and other political figures ensured that the Regia Marina never got their wish for aircraft carriers, but the detailed plans that the Navy created in each iteration show how the tactical doctrine and requirements of Italian aircraft carriers developed. It is from those designs that this line stems, and while ships might have some modifications where weaponry is concerned, all designs presented here were designs that the Regia Marina considered for service until they were struck down in political maneuvers. I have used the airplanes proposed for naval duty when possible, but in many cases I “navalised” aircraft used by the Regia Aeronautica. Traits The Italian aircraft carriers have planes that for the most part have been developed from fighter planes, so they all have the uniform 40kts boost speed and can sustain the boost for a longer period of time. Additionally, they all have better than average maneuverability and deploy an additional fighter in the squadrons summoned by fighter consumables. The Italian plane squadrons all have some unique characteristics that change the way that they need to be played in order to attain maximum efficiency. Italian rocket strike craft tend to carry fewer rockets than comparable aircraft from other nations, and the rockets themselves do not have very good characteristics; this however is somewhat counteracted by the good durability of the planes, their great maneuverability and the increased squadron and attack flight sizes. Italian dive bombers have the previously mentioned improved boost and maneuverability, however they are slower than most other dive bombers. A key characteristic of Italian dive bombers is the choice between two weapon types; they can either carry a few large HE bombs or a larger amount of smaller SAP bombs. This means that you may choose the potential for higher alpha strike of the SAP bombs over the possible damage over time of HE bombs, however do be aware that SAP bombs can fail to penetrate and bounce just like AP shells so you’ll have to be even more careful while aiming. Lastly, the Italian torpedo bombers feature the same improved boost and maneuverability as previously mentioned, but they also gain improved stability when aiming during the attack run which means you will be able to do more aggressive maneuvers while aiming without throwing off your aim too much. Additionally, the Italian torpedo bombers carry a rather decent torpedo with good damage and speed but a poor range which means that aiming properly and dropping torpedoes as close as possible to enemies will be crucial. Additional fighter consumable & additional fighter in fighter squadrons Slower than average plane replacement Below-average Rocket Strike Aircraft Average speed (Slower than USN & faster than RN) Good durability (Above average hitpoint pool) Great maneuverability Weak & not very numerous rockets Increased squadron & attack flight size Good dive bombers Improved boost speed & duration (40kts vs 35kts) Slow (only slightly faster than USN) Decent durability Choice of bombs: Medium SAP bombs Larger but fewer HE bombs Improved maneuverability Decent torpedo bombers Average speed (Slower than IJN & equal to RN) Improved boost speed & duration (40kts vs 35kts) Improved maneuverability Improved stability when aiming on attack run Decent torpedoes (good damage & speed, poor range) Warships Tier CV Prem. 1 2 3 4 Nibbio 5 6 Falco Sparviero 1942 7 8 Aquila 9 10 Avvoltoio Tech-Tree Aircraft Carriers Nibbio class Aircraft Carrier (T4) A design to convert the half-built hull of the Francesco Caracciolo to the Italian Regia Marina’s first aircraft carrier. Due to interference from the Regia Aeronautica and budgetary constraints, she was never converted and instead was scrapped. Survivability Displacement: ~22,000t standard; ~26,500t full (32,500hp standard; 34,800hp full) Armour: 180mm belt, 50-24mm deck Flight Group Flight group: ~30 Aircraft Attack Aircraft: IMAM Ro.37 Speed: 112kts (40kts boost) Durability: 1380 Payload: 2x 5-inch FFAR (1900 damage, 7% fire, 27mm penetration) Attack flight (Squad size): 4 (8) Aircraft restoration time: 45 seconds Torpedo Bombers: Fiat B.R.1 Speed: 99kts (40kts boost) Durability: 1450 Payload: 1x 45cm F200/450 Torpedo (5500 damage, 45% flood, 3km @40kts) Attack flight (Squad size): 2 (6) Aircraft restoration time: 60 seconds Dive Bombers: IMAM Ro.1 Speed: 98kts (40kts boost) Durability: 1540 Payload: 4x 24kg G.P H.E. bomb (3100 damage, 17% fire, 18.5mm penetration) Attack flight (Squad size): 2 (6) Aircraft restoration time: 55 seconds Weaponry AA Battery: 4x2 37mm/54 Breda M1932 autocannons (dmg = 102dps @3.5km 100% acc), 4x2 20mm/65 Breda M1935 guns (dmg = 32dps @2km 95% acc) Mobility Speed: 28kts - 85,000hp Size: 213m long, 31m wide, 7.5m deep Consumables Standard Damage Control Party Improved Fighter Squadron Standard Squadron Consumables Notes Original AA: 8x2 13.2mm/76 Breda 1931 (dmg = 126dps @1.5km 95% acc) AA guns Caracciolo Pg 582 carrier conversion Details can be found in "La Nave Virtuale" by Enrico Cernuschi published in Storia Militare but this picture is from "Le Navi da Battaglia Classe Caracciolo" by Antonio Mascolo From Sappino’s book: Pg 582: Flight deck: 185x25m https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/older-italian-ships.1805/#post-15309 Analysis The Nibbio has several characteristics which make him unique among the aircraft carriers at T4. Ship-wise, it is by far the largest, most heavily armoured of the aircraft carriers as befits its origins as a super-dreadnought battleship. The Nibbio has more hitpoints and a higher speed than any other aircraft carrier as well, but it pays for this by having a rather poor concealment, having no secondary weapons and a rather average anti-aircraft suite. The Nibbio has the added benefit that its fighter consumable summons a 5-plane squadron instead of a 4-plane squadron to protect itself, offering it a slight defensive boost as well against enemy aviation. It’s the tankiest aircraft carrier at its tier, but as any aircraft carrier knows, the moment you get spotted means that your time on the battlefield is coming to an end. Aircraft-wise, your bombers offer a middle-of-the-road performance as they carry 4 bombs each which means that you’ll have an easier time causing damage even if it isn’t devastating; your fighters are decently fast and have a large attack flight which means that it losing a plane or two will not be quite as bad although the planes do not carry as many rockets; and your torpedo bombers have all around decent characteristics to deliver the torpedo with some reliability. The planes may not be as different from other lines, but at tier 4 it is better to be simple than to overcomplicate, and the Nibbio will be a good training aircraft carrier for the upper tiers. Falco class Aircraft Carrier (T6) A design proposed by Filippo Bonfiglietti, it was meant to provide the Italian Regia Marina with attack and scouting capabilities. It was a very modern design that incorporated many of the best design practices from foreign navies. Budgetary constraints and political interference meant it was never built. Survivability Displacement: 15,240t standard; 17,540t full (40,050hp standard; 41,650hp full) Armour: 60mm belt, 50mm avgas tanks, 20mm hangar sides, 35mm flight deck, 40mm weather deck, 60mm armoured deck, 30mm over magazines and steering gear Flight Group Flight group: 40 Aircraft (18 Fighters, 12 Recon, 6-12 Attack Planes) Attack Aircraft: Macchi C.200 Saetta Speed: 145kts (40kts boost) Durability: 1550 Payload: 4x 5-inch FFAR (1900 damage, 7% fire, 27mm penetration) Attack flight (Squad size): 3 (9) Aircraft restoration time: 60 seconds Torpedo Bombers: Caproni Ca.310 Speed: 121kts (40kts boost) Durability: 1620 Payload: 1x 45cm Si200/450 Torpedo (5783 damage, 48% flood, 3km @40kts) Attack flight (Squad size): 2 (8) Aircraft restoration time: 75 seconds Dive Bombers: Breda Ba.65 Speed: 120kts (40kts boost) Durability: 1700 Payload (HE): 2x 100kg G.P H.E. bomb (5150 damage, 29% fire, 30.4mm penetration) Payload (SAP): 3x 104kg S.A.P. bomb (5850 damage, 53mm penetration) Attack flight (Squad size): 2 (8) Aircraft restoration time: 65 seconds Weaponry Secondary Battery: 4x2 152mm/53 M1926 guns, 8x2 100mm/47 OTO M1928 DP guns Reload: 15s (4) / 6s (10) Shell: 44.3kg @950m/s (3850 damage) SAP / 13.8kg @850m/s (1500 damage, 6% fire) HE AA Battery: 8x2 100mm/47 OTO M1928 DP guns (dmg = 84dps @4.6km 100% acc), 6x2 37mm/54 Breda M1932 autocannons (dmg = 153dps @3.5km 100% acc), 4x2 20mm/65 Breda M1935 guns (dmg = 32dps @2km 95% acc), 2x1 20mm/65 Breda M1938 guns (dmg = 20dps @2km 95% acc) Mobility Speed: 29kts - 70,000hp Size: 220m long, 30m wide, 6.12m deep Consumables Standard Damage Control Party Improved Fighter Squadron Improved Patrol Fighters Squadron Consumable Notes Original AA: 8x2 100mm/47 OTO M1928 DP guns (24dmg = 84dps @4.6km 100% acc), 4x2 37mm/54 Breda M1932 (30dmg = 105dps @3.5km 100% acc) Base planes: Fiat G.50 bis/A Freccia (attack aircraft) Caproni Ca.111 (torpedo bomber) Fiat CR.32 (dive bomber) Bonfiglietti 1929 design http://www.regiamarina.net/detail_text.asp?nid=56&lid=1 https://books.google.com.mx/books?id=Zpo_CQAAQBAJ&pg=PA60&lpg=PA60&dq=bonfiglietti+carrier&source=bl&ots=-hLJohHJiz&sig=ACfU3U2D4_lRzlHRVzhN4apaDLkIId7GUg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi5zOjQkcroAhUPnq0KHfFIChYQ6AEwDXoECFcQKQ#v=onepage&q=bonfiglietti carrier&f=false http://roetengco.blogspot.com/2012/02/regia-marina-their-aircraft-carriers-of.html Analysis The Falco is the perfect example of Italian aircraft carrier aspirations in the interwar period and is overall a fairly advanced design for its time. The ship itself has a decent anti-aircraft armament, speed and protection, and it has an above average amount of hitpoints. Aircraft-wise, the aircraft follow the normal design expectations for the line, however there are benefits that start to show. The larger attack flights employed by the attack aircraft mean that even though they individually carry fewer rockets than their counterparts, the extra plane starts bringing parity when it comes to overall payload delivery. The torpedo bombers have received an improved torpedo which causes more damage, while the airframe carrying it is relatively sturdy and allows for active maneuvering even while on an attack run. Finally, the dive bombers provide the option of using SAP bombs or HE bombs, with the SAP bombs providing an advantage when striking against heavily-armoured decks and HE bombs providing the possibility for damage over time, module breaking and an easier chance to land hits as there is no autobounce check. The Falco is a decent ship while it carries planes that should be able to adequately perform against all enemies, though they aren’t as specialised as others to more effectively deal with a particular class of ship. The Falco is a good tier 6 aircraft carrier, and the best looking one for sure! Aquila class Aircraft Carrier (T8) A wartime proposal to convert the carrier Roma into an aircraft carrier. She featured two catapults, a propulsion system gathered from two light cruisers, plating on crucial sections and numerous anti-aircraft weapons. Building work was not completed in time during the war. Survivability Displacement: 23,350t standard; 28,800t full (44,600hp standard; 48,450hp full) Armour: 60mm-80mm magazine & fuel tanks Flight Group Flight group: 51 (fixed) - 66 (folded) Aircraft (Reggiane 2001 OR) Attack Aircraft: Reggiane Re.2001 OR Falco II Speed: 151kts (40kts boost) Durability: 1720 Payload: 6x HVAR 127mm (2000 damage, 7% fire, 33mm penetration) Attack flight (Squad size): 3 (9) Aircraft restoration time: 65 seconds Torpedo Bombers: Reggiane Re.2001 OR Falco II Speed: 131kts (40kts boost) Durability: 1790 Payload: 1x 45cm Si200/450 Torpedo (5783 damage, 48% flood, 3km @40kts) Attack flight (Squad size): 3 (9) Aircraft restoration time: 75 seconds Dive Bombers: Reggiane Re.2001 OR Falco II Speed: 126kts (40kts boost) Durability: 1860 Payload (HE): 2x 250kg G.P H.E. bomb (7150 damage, 41% fire, 43.4mm penetration) Payload (SAP): 4x 100kg S.A.P. bomb (5950 damage, 54mm penetration) Attack flight (Squad size): 3 (9) Aircraft restoration time: 70 seconds Weaponry Secondary Battery: 4x2 135mm/45 guns Reload: 8.5-10s (6-7) Shell: 32.7kg @875m/s (1950 damage, 9% fire) HE AA Battery: 4x2 135mm/45 M1942 guns (dmg = 56dps @5km 100% acc), 12x1 65mm/64 M1939 guns (54dmg = 190dps @3.7km 100% acc), 22x6 20mm/70 Breda M1941 guns (88dmg = 308dps @2km 95% acc), 8x1 20mm/65 Breda M1938 guns (dmg = 78dps @2km 95% acc) Mobility Speed: 30kts - 151,000hp Size: 232.5m long, 30.1m wide, 7.31m deep Consumables Standard Damage Control Party Improved Fighter Squadron Improved Patrol Fighters Squadron Consumable Notes Original AA: 12x1 65mm/64 M1939 guns (54dmg = 190dps @3.7km 100% acc), 22x6 20mm/70 Breda M1941 guns (88dmg = 308dps @2km 95% acc) Original Secondary Battery: 8x1 135mm/45 guns Base planes: Reggiane Re.2000 Falco I (attack aircraft) Caproni Ca.314 (torpedo bomber) Breda Ba.201 (dive bomber) Analysis The Aquila was the closest the Regia Marina got to having its own aircraft carrier in during the war, with it being quite far along when the Armistice was signed. The Aquila has rather poor anti-aircraft capabilities as it only has a better sustained damage per second than the Shokaku, it is slower, lighter and carries thinner plating than other aircraft carriers as well, but it does have rather good concealment. Thankfully, concealment is one of the most important figures for aircraft carriers, and planes are the most important one. The Aquila’s planes are where the Italian aircraft carrier line starts to shine. The attack aircraft have a very good combination of above average speed, good durability and maneuverability along with an improved payload over the previous tier. They carry a good amount of rockets which now have 33mm penetration which means that they can deal damage to any enemy target if you aim at their thinner plating or superstructures. The torpedo bombers are not the best individually, but they combine average speed with decent durability, good maneuverability even while preparing to drop ordnance and a 3-plane attack flight which means that they will not suffer too much when trying to deal damage reliably to enemy ships. The dive bombers are probably the weakest of the three aircraft types, being slower than average and not carrying as much ordnance as other squadrons as they only get the choice between 2 large HE bombs and 4 medium SAP bombs. Their saving grace however is the fact that both of the ordnance choices have good penetration and thus should have an easy time penetrating the decks of almost every enemy they face, and with the improved maneuverability should reliably land their bombs on target. The Aquila is not the most impressive aircraft carrier, but it is more than capable of standing up against other tier 8 carriers in a match and making its presence felt. Avvoltoio class Aircraft Carrier (T10) This design proposed the conversion of the incomplete battleship Impero from the Vittorio Veneto class into a fleet carrier. It featured several advanced features such as a long-range rocket launching system, a ski-slope catapult ramp, new dual-purpose weapons and a bulbous bow. Design was incomplete at the time of the Armistice. Survivability Displacement: 45,000t standard; ~52,000t full (59,950hp standard; 64,900hp full) Armour: 220mm (Reduced Vittorio Veneto belt), 162-90mm deck Flight Group Flight group: 70 (fixed) Aircraft (Reggiane Re.2006 Sagittario 2) Attack Aircraft: Reggiane Re.2006 Sagittario 2 Speed: 168kts (40kts boost) Durability: 1890 Payload: 8x HVAR 127mm (2000 damage, 7% fire, 33mm penetration) Attack flight (Squad size): 4 (12) Aircraft restoration time: 70 seconds Torpedo Bombers: Reggiane Re.2006 Sagittario 2 Speed: 145kts (40kts boost) Durability: 1960 Payload: 1x 45cm Si200/450 Torpedo (5783 damage, 48% flood, 3km @40kts) Attack flight (Squad size): 4 (12) Aircraft restoration time: 80 seconds Dive Bombers: Reggiane Re.2006 Sagittario 2 Speed: 140kts (40kts boost) Durability: 2020 Payload (HE): 2x 500kg G.P H.E. bomb (9100 damage, 53% fire, 54mm penetration) Payload (SAP): 6x 100kg S.A.P. bomb (5950 damage, 54mm penetration) Attack flight (Squad size): 4 (12) Aircraft restoration time: 75 seconds Weaponry Secondary Battery: 6x2 120mm/50 M1939 DP guns Reload: 5s (12) Shell: 32.15kg @800m/s (damage) AA Battery: 6x2 120mm/50 M1939 DP guns (?dmg = 150dps @5.2km 100% acc), 2x2 64mm/64 Breda 1939 AA guns (dmg = 45dps @3.7km 100% acc), 14x2 37mm/54 Breda M1938 guns (dmg = 357dps @3.5km 100% acc), 3x2 20mm/65 Breda M1935 guns (dmg = 25dps @2km 95% acc), 8x1 20mm/65 Breda M1938 guns (dmg = 78dps @2km 95% acc) Mobility Speed: 30kts - 130,000hp Size: 240m long, 42.7m wide, 10.4m deep Consumables Standard Damage Control Party Improved Fighter Squadron Improved Patrol Fighters Squadron Notes Original AA: 6x1 120mm/50 M1939 DP guns (?dmg = 105dps @5.2km 100% acc), 12x2 37mm/54 Breda M1938 guns (dmg = 306dps @3.5km 100% acc), 22x1 20mm/65 Breda M1938 guns (dmg = 216dps @2km 95% acc) Base planes: Reggiane Re.2005 Sagittario (attack aircraft) Reggiane Re.2005 Sagittario (torpedo bomber) Reggiane Re.2005 Sagittario (dive bomber) Impero’s CV aircraft conversion https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/25247-fan-made-italian-tech-tree/?page=3#entry837056 https://stefsap.wordpress.com/2015/11/05/rn-impero-battleship-to-aircraft-carrier-conversion-study-1200-model/ Analysis The Avvoltoio is the first fleet carrier that the Italian Regia Marina wanted to build using the incomplete Impero’s hull as a basis. It featured revolutionary features for an aircraft carrier that would become commonplace for aircraft carriers after the war, and while those features are hard to show in-game, the Avvoltoio would’ve been an excellent aircraft carrier. As implemented in the game, the Avvoltoio still shows part of its origins as a battleship with its 220mm armoured belt and extensive armoured deck which makes it probably the most heavily armoured aircraft carrier at tier 10, it also has one of the best concealments as it is rather low on the water when compared to some of its tiermates. The downside to such origins however is the relatively poor speed of 30kts which is the worst at its tier (though still acceptable) and the relatively average anti-aircraft capabilities, which while excellent for an Italian ship, still lag far behind some of its tiermates. Plane-wise, the Avvoltoio carries the most advanced aircraft developed by Italy during the war and their performance is suitably good. The attack aircraft now pack a punch by virtue of carrying 8 rockets a piece, and their unique attack-flight size of 4 means that there will always be a lot of rockets being delivered to enemies, even through some heavy AA. They are also quite fast and durable, which will ensure that they spend fewer time under threat of enemy AA batteries and that they’ll be able to resist quite a bit of damage before being shot down. The torpedo bombers also benefit from the larger attack flight size which means that although they each drop a single torpedo they can still cause considerable damage onto enemies and that should be helped by the improved maneuverability and improved aiming. Their speed, improved boost and durability should ensure that they can drop ordnance even onto relatively protected enemies. Lastly, the dive bombers can now shine with their good speed, durability, maneuverability and boost all helping the bombers through enemy AA fire to then drop ordnance on enemies. The choice of ordnance becomes more poignant now as there will be a lot more enemy ships that have decks capable of bouncing SAP bombs if they’re not properly aimed, while the HE bombs do not have such an issue, so it becomes a case of choosing between reliable HE damage with a good chance to cause damage over time or trying your luck at using SAP bombs and dropping a barrage of them on enemies hoping on a big alpha strike. The increased attack flight size will help make sure that whatever choice you make, a lot of ordnance is dropped onto enemies. Overall, the Avvoltoio is the culmination of Italian aircraft carrier design, having a series of navalized and modified fighters in all roles, giving it the chance to defeat enemies through large attack flight strikes and should be a rather interesting tier 10 aircraft carrier.
  7. SuperRodge52

    Guilio Cesare

    Will Guilio Cesare ever be back for sale?
  8. I just go the Dante Alighieri from the Amazon drop and was going over her stats and looking at captain builds. When I noticed that the "recommended" build for her includes a light secondary build with a bit of survivability. . But when looking at her gunnery stats I really don't see anything - other than a large number of secondaries - that would suggest this would be a viable way to go. So my question to those who are more knowledgeable, is this really WG intentions for this line to have a serious secondary component, and I am just missing something? Or is this an example of the skill rework not - syncing - with game elements? Thank you for thoughtful response in advance!
  9. Totenliste

    Italian Battleship Lineup

    Really need some more BB action. So killing time made a possible lineup based on comparisons: Battleships T II: Regina Margherita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regina_Margherita-class_battleship (possible but not necessary like Mikasa think premium) T III: Regina Elena https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regina_Elena-class_battleship (the 1902 proposed upgraded version all one caliber by Cuniberti) T IV: Dante Alighieri https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_battleship_Dante_Alighieri T V: Andrea Doria/Caio Duilio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Doria-class_battleship (alt: Conte Di Cavour) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conte_di_Cavour-class_battleship [Giulio Cesare] T VI: Francesco Caracciolo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francesco_Caracciolo-class_battleship T VII: BB 1935 was in response to the French BB Dunkerque T VIII: Littorio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littorio-class_battleship [Roma] T IX: Impero (Impero and Piave/BB1936 from below links) an upgraded Littorio (led to the design of Sovetsky Soyuz T XI Russian BB) T X: Piave/ BB1936 also called UP 41 (Think Littorio but with 406mm guns) *: Tier V (though possible alt) and VIII were already decided. *Always open to suggestions if anyone has a better idea for a ship or a tier placement. Special Thanks go to the 2 guys links above.
  10. Welcome to my latest tech tree proposal! Here's the revised version: Read full article This article will touch on both the tech-tree regular ships and premium ships. For each ship, I provide the layout of how the ship's weaponry is distributed, its technical specifications and with the same formulas I used for the ADLA articles, their in-game values. Finally, I provide a small piece of analysis of what I think about the ship and how it'd fit with its tiermates. Essentially, each of the ships gets a mini-ADLA with all the information you might be looking for to compare it to its tiermates that are already in-game. Let's hope we see these ships in the virtual seas soon! Read Full Article... or the Revised Version Let me know what you think of this! I'm working on the Italian and French CV tech-tree lines so I can incorporate your suggestions for it! All feedback and comments are welcome! IL RISORGIMENTO DI LA CORAZZATA ITALIANA! PS: No ship in this line is 100% fictional, though the T10's both are designs based in part on historical designs.
  11. LittleWhiteMouse

    Premium Ship Review: Roma

    The following is a review of Roma, a ship kindly provided to me by Wargaming. As far as I am aware, this is the release version of the vessel and these stats are current as of January 12th, 2018. However, things may change before release. GARBAGE - The boat is unbalanced, not fun to play and weak. The ship desperately needs some buffs or some quality of life changes. Mehbote - An average ship. Has strengths and weaknesses. Doesn't need buffs to be viable however she's not going to be considered optimal. Gudbote - A powerful ship, often one of the best ships at a given role within its tier. Usually considered optimal for a given task. OVERPOWERED - The boat is unbalanced and powerful. Typically she's either horrible to play against or she redefines the meta entirely. Quick Summary: A fast, sneaky battleship with excellent gun handling on its nine 381mm rifles. Cost: Undisclosed at the time of publishing. Patch & Date Written: Patch 0.6.15.1 to January 1st through 12th, 2018. PROs Has an extended belt which reaches halfway up the prow. Excellent gun handling with fast turret traverse. Phenomenal muzzle velocity and energy retention, giving her fast shell flight times over distance. Great AP penetration power over range. Good concealment with a 14.9km surface detection range which can be reduced down to 11.2km. CONs Citadel sits well above the waterline. Short ranged for a tier VIII battleship at 18.1km. Her guns misbehave, with poor dispersion values, overmatch problems and overpenetration after overpenetration. Awful HE performance with low alpha strike, poor fire chance and mediocre module damage. Anti-aircraft firepower is short ranged with only modest DPS. Large turning radius, mediocre ship rotation rate. Overview Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / Challenging / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / High / Extreme The ease of her game play is facilitated by her excellent gun handling and good concealment values which will make her more forgiving to novice players. However, her raised citadel and gun accuracy will cause them problems. The combination of high concealment, speed and firepower will be of interest to Veterans and the power of these traits must not be overlooked. Roma's citadel and her smaller-caliber AP shells will hold her back from being a true monster, though. Roma is not a complicated battleship to play. She has no gimmicks to espouse. The summation of her various traits is as follows, with a more thorough breakdown found below in the larger sections. GARBAGE - One of, if not the worst at its tier. This is a pronounced weakness. MEH - Middle of the pack at its tier. Not terrible, but not terribly good either.GUD - Has a significant advantage over her tier mates. A solid, competitive performer.BEST - No other ship at its tier does this as well as this ship. Roma is no up-scaled Giulio Cesare. Her guns are average and she has mediocre durability and agility. She has no gimmicks to speak of. The only thing she does well is hide and her AA power is hot garbage With all of these disparate traits, she probably doesn't look very appealing. So how the heck did I reach a "Gudbote" conclusion? Well, let's look into that... Options Like the Japanese premium battleships Kii and Ashitaka, Roma is receiving a special camouflage designed by Makoto Kobayashi. This is not just a skin, but a full on geometry change for the ship, including the infamous "beer can" where her rangefinders would be. It will likely be available through the larger bundle packages when you buy the ship through the online store. Consumables: Roma's Damage Control Party is standard for a non-American / Japanese battleship with a 15s active period and a 120s / 80s reset timer depending on which version you purchase. Her Repair Party is also standard, healing back 14% of her maximum health over 28s. Finally, her Spotter Aircraft is normal. You can swap this out for a Float Plane Fighter which provides 57 DPS and boasts 1,590hp. She has higher DPS than Japanese or American float plane fighters and more hit points than Japanese, American or British fighters. Premium Camouflage: There are two available: The default, Standard Type 10 camouflage provides 50% bonus experience gains, a 10% reduction to maintenance costs, 3% reduction in surface detection and 4% reduction in enemy accuracy. The Makoto Kobayashi - Roma camouflage provides 100% bonus experience gains, -50% to the post-battle service costs, +20% bonus credit earning, 3% reduction in surface detection and 4% reduction in enemy accuracy. When I first saw this alternative camouflage scheme, I thought it looked ridiculous. However it has really grown on me. The amount of small detail is spectacular. Plus, it looks like Roma is wearing a hat. I like it when not-people things wear hats. Ergo, I like this camo. Module Upgrades: Five slots, standard battleship options. In your first slot, take Main Armaments Modification 1. Next, take Damage Control Modification 1. In your third slot, Aiming Systems Modification 1 is optimal. It's not worth trying to upgrade her AA Guns or Secondaries. Damage Control Modification 2 is optimal for her fourth slot. You may be tempted to take Steering Gears Modification 2 but this will not significantly improve her agility . Finally, take Concealment Modification 1 in your final slot. This will reduce her surface detection down to 13.04km with camouflage before Commander Skills or 11.22km with camouflage and Concealment Expert Firepower Primary Battery: Nine 381mm rifles in three turrets in an A-B-Y superfiring configuration. Secondary Battery: Twelve 152mm rifles in four turrets, Twelve dual-purpose 90mm rifles in single turrets. Roma's main battery guns will deceive you. You're going to imagine them as being far more effective than they truly are. The deceptive veil she'll cast over your eyes has three layers; namely gun handling, shell flight time and penetration. They will cloud your vision and make you less aware of two flaws -- one minor but one pronounced -- the latter of which has the potential to greatly sour your enjoyment of this ship, no matter how comfortable her earlier lies may have felt. Beautiful Lie #1: Gun Handling The first beauty-mark you'll note is Roma's turret traverse rate and she may win you over with just this aspect. Her gun handling is simply gorgeous with her turrets rotating at 6º per second (a mere 30 seconds for 180º). This is 50% faster than the 4º per second rotation of ships like Kii, North Carolina and Monarch and a whole degree per second faster than Bismarck and Tirpitz. Thanks to this, laying her guns on target is a breeze and there's no chance of her aim slipping off target even while under heavy manoeuvres. In brawls, Roma can easily track enemies even on close approaches. Her forward fire angles are similarly wonderful. They almost hit the highly sought after (but so seldom realized) 30º-off-the-bow benchmark which defines truly excellent fire arcs. Her X-turret can engage enemies 31º off her forward centerline, allowing Roma to take very aggressive bow-on attack angles and necessitating only the slightest touches of a rudder to unload all nine guns. In short, Roma's gun handling is fun. You will never feel like you're fighting with this ship to bring your weapons to bear. Beautiful Lie #2: Shell Flight Time Roma has one of the fastest muzzle velocities of any tier VIII battleship, making gunnery a delight. What's more, her shells preserve this energy beautifully over distance which in turn leads to lower shell flight times. She can put a shell out to 10km in less than five seconds and one out to 15km in less then eight. This is something which Bismarck, Amagi, Monarch and North Carolina cannot boast. In the time it takes North Carolina to throw a shell out to 17km, Roma can bullseye a target at 20km. Her short lead times greatly cuts into the reaction time enemy ships have to evade your shells, even at range. Beautiful Lie #3: Penetration The high velocity of Roma's shells translates to great kinetic energy. It's the preservation of said energy over distance which makes Roma's penetration values so frightening. She doesn't have the same raw penetration power at point blank ranges of the Japanese 410mm shells. However, at ranges greater than 10km, Roma takes primacy, outstripping every other battleship with her energy retention. She has comparable and better penetration at 20km than Bismarck and Monarch (respectively) have at 15km. Roma is thus a threat at all ranges, capable of stacking damage even against thick hided battleships within reach of her weapons. These three traits will deceive you into thinking she's well set up to land damaging hits against enemy vessels. Her guns can snap onto a target quickly. Her muzzle velocity makes leading said targets easy, allowing you to catch targets before they're able to dodge or angle. Her penetration power all but guarantees that any hits you land will be damaging ones. That's all well and fine in theory, but in practice, problems arise. Roma boasts good fire arcs forward thanks to the excellent sweep of her X-turret. Her rearward arcs are terrible, forcing you to expose far too much of your broadside. Anytime you fire to your rear, you risk taking catastrophic damage. Harsh Truths No one can take away the awesomeness that is Roma's turret traverse rate and shell flight time. Let me be clear: few battleships have as smooth and comfortable a rotation and short lead times of their main battery as this Italian beauty. However, not everything about her guns lends to good performance. Roma's fire angles are the first let down. It's true, her forward fire angles are wonderful. However, rearward, it's a completely different story. Firing from A or B turret while on the retreat will get you sunk in a hurry. This isn't a problem unique to Roma, but few battleships can be punished as readily as Roma when they over angle due to her high water citadel (more on that later). I've found it preferable to use (and abuse) Roma's concealment if forced to retreat. At close range, her high muzzle velocity can also be a detriment. With the standard 0.033s fuse timer, Roma's shells risk blowing clean through more lightly armoured cruisers, especially at short ranges. To test this, I used a Reference-Omaha™ and found that Roma must be at least 13.3km out in order to land citadel hits on a target showing her flat broadside, provided the shells didn't strike water first. North Carolina can manage the same at 5.0km, owing to her lower muzzle velocity and steeper angle of her shell fall. This is a problem that extends beyond Reference-Omaha™ and it can be infuriating to catch a cruiser broadside with perfectly aimed (and dispersing) AP shells only to watch them all over penetrate a Chapayev or Edinburgh. Being unable to overmatch the bows of select cruisers just exacerbates matters. This leads me to stare down the problems Roma has with AP penetration with her 381mm rifles. She cannot overmatch the 27mm extremities found on many heavy cruisers at tier VIII+. It's surprising how much of an issue this causes. A properly angled American or Japanese heavy cruiser can simply bounce her AP shells for days with the appropriate stance. When combined with the fuse problems mentioned above, Roma must juggle different optimal fire ranges when engaging different targets. To penetrate small, lightly armoured vessels like Nurnberg-class, French or Royal Navy light cruisers you need distance. You may have to wait until the target angles slightly before sending your shells off. For tier VIII+ heavy cruisers, you need to catch them broadside or risk seeing your volleys bounce ineffectively. Roma's dispersion with Aiming Systems Modification 1 installed. 180 shells fired, salvo by salvo at 15km, locked onto a stationary Fuso. One of Roma's more pronounced gunnery weaknesses is her poor dispersion. This isn't so much a trait of her 1.8 sigma, but more of her long vertical dispersion axis which you can see here causing tremendous levels of overshooting and undershooting the target by a whole ship length to either side. This is approximately 50% larger than comparable area of battleship Alabama and Massachusetts which cannot mount any dispersion modification. The Big Fail: Dispersion and HE. Roma's most telling flaw with her guns is her dispersion. The Italian battleships of the Regia Marina use German dispersion patterns. In this regard, Roma's gunnery is most akin to Bismarck with one extra gun barrel and 4 seconds longer on her reload. The high velocity of her guns causes many shots to land long or short. Couple this with the wider base horizontal dispersion than any other battleship group in the game, and Roma's German dispersion leads to a lot of wonky shell groupings. It's not like Roma can simply reach for HE and solve her penetration issues either. Roma's HE shells deal a low amount of damage at 5,100 maximum per shell. That's 1,683 per penetrating hit and 852 damage per saturated penetrating hit. These values do not compare well to the 1,200 damage done by one of Roma's over penetrating AP shells. Her fire chance is abysmal at a mere 24%. She doesn't even have an especially large module-damage radius. For all this lackluster performance, she doesn't even get to enjoy the German bonus HE penetration. You largely want to avoid having to resort to these shells unless circumstance deem it necessary. Relying on Roma's HE shells too often will see her damage potential plummet. In summary Roma's gunnery is inconsistent -- more so than many other battleships. While it is easy to bring her guns on target with her fast traverse and anticipate their manoeuvres with her high muzzle velocity, Roma is unreliable at landing solid, damaging hits. This is very frustrating for a ship where the gunnery otherwise feels very comfortable. Her dispersion forces you suffer the whims of RNG. Even when you line up the perfect shot, over penetrations and ricochets will abound and her HE shells are downright anemic. Roma has two secondary gun types and neither is effective. They lack range, with a 5.0km base reach. In addition, one mount does not fire fast enough and the other is too small in caliber. The most dramatic of the pair are her 152mm rifles, mounted in triple gun turrets, two per side flanking B and X turret respectively. They are incredibly slow firing with a horrendous 12.0 second reload and they use AP ammunition. The best thing that could be said about this particular mount is that the muzzle blast is enormous and your opponents may mistake it for you firing your main battery guns in a brawl and expose their sides, thinking themselves safe to fire back. Roma's 90mm guns fire much more quickly with a 4.0s reload. Though they fire HE, their fire chance isn't particularly good. What's more, their small gun caliber makes them ineffective at dealing direct damage enemy ships. Even most destroyers in her matchmaking spread can boast enough armour to foil the penetration value of her HE shells. Short of peppering superstructures, these guns aren't going to do much in the way of direct damage themselves. Taking Inertial Fuse for HE Shells will increase her penetration enough to allow her to directly damage destroyers and some light cruisers with these guns, but that's a heavy investment for questionable gains. In general, it is not worth sinking upgrades, consumables or skills into Roma's secondaries. Conclusions It's hard to call any of Roma's weapon systems "good". Roma's 381mm guns do not enjoy the rate of fire bonus found on Monarch, Tirpitz and Bismarck. Maybe if she had that phenomenal rate of fire or some accuracy tweak, I could shower them with praise with good conscience. However, with a piss-poor HE shell and forgettable secondaries, Roma is reliant upon her main battery AP shells to carry the day. Fortunately, they're sufficient to the task. And maybe that's the best way to define Roma's AP gunnery: It's comfortable and it's sufficient. She won't win any prizes but she'll hold her own. Summary: Roma's gunnery feels so comfortable. Her gunnery performance is spotty. They seem to do really well against battleships (up until they angle) but against cruisers, it's a lot more inconsistent depending on angle, ship type and range. Her secondaries aren't worth specializing into. Evaluation: MEH What it would have needed to be GUD: Roma's dispersion can be very unkind. A buff to her sigma value would alleviate this. An alternative solution would be shaving a second or two off her reload time. With so many misunderstandings about the reload time of the Littorio-class, I suppose we should be glad that Wargaming kept it to a mere 30 seconds. Manoeuvrability Top Speed: 30.0 knotsTurning Radius: 810mRudder Shift: 15.6s Maximum Turn Rate: 4.2º/s Tier 8 Battleship speed, turning radius and rate of turn. Roma doesn't excel in any one area nor does she have any glaring weaknesses. Roma is on the good-side of average for manoevrability for a tier VIII battleship. Her top speed is okay but there are faster ships. Her rate of turn is alright, but she's not exactly agile like the South Dakota-class sisters. Her turning circle isn't terrible, though its certainly not great. Overall, her handling is best compared to Bismarck -- a ship that isn't lacking overall in comparable agility but not a ship anyone would dare say has "good" manoeuvrability. The reason Roma feels so agile is probably due to her gun traverse. At 6º per second, it's rare that you ever need to use your rudder to accelerate bringing your guns to bear onto a new target. It's impossible for this ship to out turn her turrets, so there's little strain on her handling to keep her weapons singing. The best trait about her here is her top speed. 30 knots, while unremarkable at high tiers, is the benchmark I want to see. Anything less is an obvious flaw. Roma has the flexibility to go where she's needed and she's fast enough to make pursuit and escape possible when required. This also allows her to make better use of her concealment to better position herself. Most important of all, Roma's manoeuvrability is sufficient to protect her vulnerable citadel while still maintaining a steady rate of fire with all nine of her guns. Evaluation: MEH What it would have needed to be GUD: Roma already sits on the cusp of being 'GUD', she would just need a little help. An extra knot of speed, getting her turning radius below 800m or increasing her rotation rate by another two tenths of a degree per second would each tip her over the edge to something quite remarkable. Fortunately, you can pull this off yourself with the use of a Sierra Mike signal. Rate of Turn There are several factors which affect how quickly a ship comes about. The most significant are the ship's forward momentum and the size of her turning radius. As a ship slows down, their turning radius changes, but not always for the better. To make things more complicated, different ships also preserve speed better in a turn. When it comes to changing your heading, maintain speed whenever possible. If you want a tighter turning circle, slow down to 3/4 engine power -- but be aware that your ship will not manoeuvre as quickly. Steering Gears Modification 2 reduces Roma's rudder shift time from 15.6s down to 12.5s. However, this does not appreciably affect her turning values. This upgrade can be seen as more of a placebo than a practical bonus. When attempting to measure the gains made, some of the results fell within the margin of error of my own reaction time -- meaning that a good night's sleep or a cup of tea had more effect on the timed rate of turn than whether or not Roma had this module installed. With torpedo and shell reaction times often being less than 8 to 10 seconds, having this module installed will not help you. You would be better served by having a cup of coffee. Thus, I strongly recommend installing Damage Control Modification 2 in your fourth upgrade slot instead. None of the values found on Roma were far from what was expected. Her measured turning radius was slightly higher than that found in port and she bled the usual 25% maximum speed with her rudder hard over. 360º Rotation Rate (Ship Maximums): 1/4 speed (7.3 knots): 1.0º/s rotation, ~1099m turning radius 1/2 speed (13.8 knots): 2.5º/s rotation, ~851m turning radius 3/4 speed (18.6 knots): 3.6º/s rotation, ~800m turning radius 4/4 speed (22.4 knots): 4.2º/s rotation, ~829m turning radius 90º Rotation Rate (Stock): 1/4 speed: 1.0º/s rotation for 90.7s 1/2 speed: 2.3º/s rotation for 39.0s 3/4 speed: 3.2º/s rotation for 28.5s 4/4 speed: 3.6/s rotation for 25.0s 90º Rotation Rate (Steering Gears Modification 2) 1/4 speed: 1.0/s rotation for 90.6s 1/2 speed: 2.4º/s rotation for 38.4s 3/4 speed: 3.3º/s rotation for 27.4s 4/4 speed: 3.7º/s rotation for 24.2s Roma sits upon the cusp of greatness where her agility is concerned, but she falls short. You're not likely to notice though -- you'll be too enamored with how well her turrets traverse. DurabilityHit Points: 65,400 Maximum Citadel Protection: 375mm + 40mm Min Bow & Deck Armour: 32mmTorpedo Damage Reduction: 38% Let's start with the bad news: Roma wears a really short skirt. While I appreciate that she wants to show off her lines, her citadel is left exposed over the water's surface by a not-insignificant margin. The exact height of her citadel is easy to see: it's directly behind her 375mm armoured belt. Veterans of the American battleship line that played the ships before the citadels were lowered in early 2017 will remember well what this entails. Roma can and will suddenly explode in a horrendous space-kablooie when she's caught broadside. There's nothing you can do about it but [edited]. There's another piece of not-so-great news. Her A-Turret barbette also seems to be part of the citadel, comprising a rounded 210mm bulge to her transverse bulkhead. This gives shells that might have skipped over a flat surface another bite at the apple if they catch this rounded surface. It's just another little quibble to sour Roma's armour protection. Alright, with that out of the way, let's talk about the good stuff: Her main deck is 45mm thick. This is proof against 152mm HE spam. Hooray! She has a 130mm extended forward armoured belt. When she angles, can foil even 460mm shells. Rejoice! Her upper hull is 70mm thick. This is proof against HE from 420mm or smaller unless it's British BB or German BB & CA thrown. This will also provide you with some very comfortable bounces when you angle just right. Her torpedo damage reduction is pretty darned good, so to speak. At tier VIII, torpedo defenses are either amazaballs (Amagi, South Dakota sisters) or they suck moose balls (everyone else). Roma's in the good half of the dichotomy. Her deck armour profile is a bit of a mixed blessing when it comes to armour piercing bombs, however. In testing, American AP bombs just didn't seem to be able to stack damage quickly. Without heals, it took over 20 bomb hits to sink her from American planes. Graf Zeppelin's (admittedly still in testing) bombs weren't automatic world-enders, but she could reliably sink Roma with two squadrons. On the whole, if it weren't for Roma's citadel situation, she'd have a great armour profile. As it is, it's only okay. Roma face tanks like a boss, particularly at medium ranges (between 8km and 14km) but when things go wrong, she comes apart in a hurry. Roma's armour, including details of her citadel. Evaluation: MEH What it would have needed to be GUD: Lower her bloody citadel. Anti-Aircraft Defense AA Battery Calibers: 90mm / 37mm / 20mmAA Umbrella Ranges: 4.0km / 3.5km / 2.0kmAA DPS per Aura: 114 / 128.4 / 54.4 The graph on the left shows the raw AA values per aura range of the AA mounts of tier 8 Battleships. The graph on the right applies a formula {AA DPS x ( Range - 1.0km )} to calculate the overall effectiveness of the ship's AA power. This weights longer ranged weapons as being much more valuable as planes will linger within their effect longer. Weapons with less than a 2km range are only really effective if the enemy aircraft carrier parks planes on top of you. If there's one good thing you could say about Roma's anti-aircraft firepower, it would be that it's at least better than that found on Tirpitz. Roma's AA rating sits squarely in between the German premium and Amagi, and this isn't a good place to be. Worse, it's not like Roma's anti-aircraft guns are a straight up improvement over the performance of the German premium -- she just has more of them. Roma's large caliber, 90mm guns are hands down inferior to the 105s that Tirpitz uses. They have 500m less range and they do less DPS over all, which makes the effective AA defense worse were it not for Roma's 37mm autocannons and Tirpitz's near lack of medium caliber guns. It takes a rather heavy investment to get Roma's anti-aircraft firepower anywhere near effective in terms of range, and it's downright impossible to make it effective in terms of damage done. With Advanced Fire Training and AA Guns Modification 2, you can increase the reach fo her 90mm guns from 4.0km up to 5.76km but they'll never have the punch to make anything but a stock tier VI aircraft carrier balk. Taking a Float Plane Fighter can add a very helpful disruption effect to an incoming wave which can save your ship, but it's so short lived and difficult to rely upon. Roma doesn't have the agility to easily dodge air dropped torpedoes, nor does she have the armour profile to spare her the nightmare of being one-shot by German AP dive bombers. Roma, when isolated from allies, is easy prey for an enemy aircraft carrier and she must be played with this weakness in mind. Evaluation: GARBAGE What it would have needed to be MEH: Roma really needs more range. The 4.0km reach of her large caliber, dual purpose guns does her no favours. Alternatively, it would take a huge DPS boost to make her AA power competitive which is a much more significant change. None of Roma's AA mounts are especially durable. Even her dual purpose AA guns can only boast 800hp with her 37mm and 20mm guns having only 200. A few HE hits will strip her of most of her AA power. Vision Control Base Surface Detection Range: 14.94km Air Detection Range: 13.35km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 11.22km Detection Range when Firing from Smoke: 13.68km Main Battery Firing Range: 18.12km Detection Consumables: Spotter Aircraft / Float Plane Fighter Short of the famous and historical HMS Monarch, Roma is the stealthiest battleship within her matchmaking spread. What's perhaps more frightening is that she's stealthier than almost half the cruisers she faces, even when they're rigged for full concealment. Tier VI and VII cruisers are especially vulnerable with 11 out of 24 ships unable to hide from Roma and another 7 unable to hide if they don't have a full concealment build. When top tier, especially against inexperienced commanders, Roma becomes truly a monster. Without spotting aircraft or a destroyer screen, she can move about the battlefield at will, confident she can outfight anything that detects her. Let me stress this: Without aircraft or destroyers, Roma is quite capable of being the stealthiest ship on the playing field. Unlike the famous and historical HMS Monarch, Roma has the speed to better exploit this concealment. And it's here, with this combination of speed and concealment where Roma becomes a truly frightening vessel. Novice players take note: these are traits that expert players exploit to win matches. The longer a match goes on, the more powerful this advantage of speed and stealth becomes. It gives Roma time to heal, to flank, to secure objectives or escape. She can dictate engagement distances, abuse cover and surprise enemies. This is the game changer for this ship. This is what glosses over all of her other mediocre ratings and propels her towards excellence. Now this all said, this is a very difficult advantage to exploit properly and it can be outright negated by aircraft (especially given Roma's poor AA rating) and destroyers. Proper use of her aircraft consumable (with the skills to support it) will help her control vision and make lurking around islands less dangerous. But, it's knowing when to keep her guns singing and when it's best to hold your fire that really defines Roma's use and abuse of her concealment. Evaluation: GUD What it would have needed to be BEST : Monarch has a smaller surface detection range and similar consumable options. The alternative to making her sneakier than Monarch would have been to provide her with some detection consumable like Hydroacoustic Search or Surveillance Radar which is bloody unlikely. I think we can all be happy that Roma's concealment is as amazing as it is. Nursing the Twins For Roma, a survivability build is best after grabbing your concealment skills. Start with Priority Target unless you've seen the oracle and you already know the future. Then you can go for skills like Direction Center for Catapult Aircraft instead for your first choice. Next up, we want Adrenaline Rush to increase her sluggish rate of fire. After that, you have your choice of Basics of Survivability or Superintendent depending on how much you hate fire damage. Finally, grab Concealment Expert to level up Roma to her final form. For your next 9pts, I strongly recommend Fire Prevention, whichever tier 3 skill you skipped and your choice of Expert Marksman (cause why not?), Jack of All Trades or High Alert. Now get out there and murder your brother. Tier for tier, Giulio Cesare is the better of the two Italian Battleships. However, the Makoto Kobayashi: Roma camouflage combined with Roma's higher tier will make her the better potential earner. Final Evaluation Mouse's Summary: Concealment and comfort define this ship. I stress that Roma's high water citadel will be a deal breaker for some. As cool as Roma's secondaries and AA batteries look, they're pretty darned useless. Roma's scorecard looks a little better than my first evaluation once you peel back the layers and take a closer look. Her great concealment might functionally be the best within her Matchmaking spread thanks to her speed. Similarly, her agility is also reasonably good, just not quite enough to make her remarkable. This synergy between speed, gun handling and concealment has all the hallmarks of a competitive ship. Her gunnery and durability are the let downs, though. Her weapons are inconsistent -- prone to bouts of greatness and then some frustrating droughts of non-performance until you figure out her penetration. Knowing what ships you can and cannot handle at which ranges mitigates some of this lack, but only just. Contrarily, her secondaries, like her AA guns are garbage no matter what you do.. Then there's that citadel of hers -- that fly in the ointment that will preclude her from ever being the darling of the competitive scene. In Randoms, with proper positioning, it's not really a big deal, but when it lets you down, it lets you down hard. Roma is so much fun to drive it's hard to dismiss her out of hand, even despite these setbacks. My own experiences in Roma were decidedly mixed. It took me a while to figure her out. Once I accepted I was throwing around what amounted to a squishy, nine-gun Bismarck with no secondaries, things got a little better. To say my performance in her was inconsistent would be an understatement. The number of losses I suffered during the latter half of play testing wasn't fun, however this was broken up by some ridiculously high performing games. Boiled down, Roma is a medium-range brawler. Her gun accuracy and armour profile both excel if she can hold this range -- just on the cusp of her detection radius, and hammer the enemy over and over and over again. Ideally you want to sneak to a vantage where your opponents can't help but give up their side to either you or their allies. If they choose to face you, tank them and do the best you can to hurt them back -- it's not going to be easy with those 381mm guns. If they choose to face your allies, tear them a new one until they smarten up and fall back. The final question is if this is a role that's asked for in the current meta. She's not a brawler like Bismarck or Tirpitz, a DPM juggernaut like Amagi, and she doesn't werf the flammen like the famous, historical battleship Monarch. Roma encroaches upon the flanking meta espoused by the American battleships. She's certainly faster than North Carolina or the South Dakota sisters. She's also more stealthy. However, she lacks the AA power to afford her autonomy when enemy aircraft carriers are in play. -- not that they're out there that often. It's still difficult to call just based on that. Things change when you look at her tiering. Top tier, she's an absolute monster. She would easily hold my pick for one of the best battleships for clubbing lower tiered vessels and this in of itself should say something. That comfort and control pays dividends and her armour maximizes in these encounters where shell penetration may not be enough to seriously threaten Roma's raised citadel. She uptiers alright against tier IX ships, but like all tier VIIIs, she really struggles in tier X matches. If I could guarantee she would never see tier X games, I could slap an "OVERPOWERED" label on her and be done with it, but no such luck. As it is, I'm inclined to say Roma has earned her laurels. Would I Recommend? Some caveats must be exercised here. The Italian Regia Marina is solely comprised of premium ships at the moment. Between the battleships Roma and Giulio Cesare there are also the light cruisers Duca d'Aosta and the upcoming Duca degli Abruzzi. If you had to choose one and only one, Giulio Cesare is still the front runner performance wise, even at tier V. Roma does not displace her. PVE Battles How well does the ship maintain profitability in Co-Op modes and how does she fare against bots? We have no tier VIII scenarios (yet), but Roma's a decent ship to take against bots. Her AP shells struggle a little against cruisers at the point blank ranges which so often result. Her running costs are 35,438 credits including the 10% discount provided by her camouflage (this drops to 19,688 credits with Makoto Kobayashi: Roma camo) while you can make around 100k on a decent win. Skip those premium consumables. Random Battle Grinding:This includes training captains, collecting free experience, earning credits and collecting signal flags from achievements. She's a tier VIII premium, so economy wise, she'll do you just fine. The increased earnings will also make her a wonderful trainer. Note if you have the Makoto Kobayashi: Roma camouflage, her earning dividends just got that much better. For Competitive Gaming:Competitive Gaming includes Ranked Battles and other skill-based tournaments. This also includes stat-padding. I have to give her a firm pass here. Between her high water citadel, 381mm teething issues and poor AA power, she's not ideal. For Collectors:If you enjoy ship history or possessing rare ships, this section is for you. What are you, new? It's not only the first Littorio-class battleships it's Roma. Even as a port queen, she's gorgeous to look at. For Fun Factor: Bottom line: Is the ship fun to play? Hells to the yeah. Roma doesn't always behave, but when she does... In Closing That about wraps it up for Roma -- arguably the most anticipated premium of 2017. Hey, stop looking at your calendar! She's here and she's not terrible; that's a win. I keep a list of premium ships that I enjoy playing; that I reach for whenever I just want to play World of Warships and unplug my brain from all of this analytical nonsense. These are ships that I play simply for the love of the game. I think it's high praise when a new premium ousts one of the old guard and muscles in on this list. Roma isn't there yet -- we're fighting, truth be told. She's got a long ways to go if she thinks she can earn her keep. I'm very happy with the balanced state of Roma. I'm very happy to have this review done. The next review coming up will be Musashi, the tier IX Japanese battleship that's causing all kinds of controversy. Roma and Musashi both came off of the content-embargo on the same date, but I had no warning about the latter. You can expect this next review in about a week's time with an undue level of snark laced throughout. A very special thank you to Lert for his continued editing efforts and to my patrons on Patreon. With as much time and energy I devote to these reviews, I cannot afford to do it alone anymore. Your continued support means the world to me and allows me to keep my head down and working hard with less worry. Thank you for reading and for all of your feedback, criticism and fun gifs too! My current ten favourite ships. Top Row: Fujin, Atlanta, De Grasse, Prinz Eugen, Atago. Bottom Row: Scharnhorst, Nelson, Harekaze, König Albert, Warspite. Will Roma or Musashi earn a spot? Tune in next week! iChase put together a wonderful little history piece for those who want more Roma in your Roma review!
  12. YukikazeTheSnowyWind

    Italian DD's

    I am a huge fan of the game War-Gaming has made in world of warships. My favorite tech-line in the game is easily the destroyer. While I currently love the destroyers that are actively featured in the game. I would love to see the Italian Destroyers back on the list of new content to enter the game. I really like the way the cruisers played out and I would thoroughly enjoy seeing my favorite class continuing the legacy of the Italian nation. Please War-gaming take into serious consideration my request. Thank you for your time reading and responding to the feedback.
  13. Phoenix_jz’s Italian Battleship Tech Tree Hello all, I’m back at it again with tech trees, and this time I’m throwing out an idea for the Regia Marina, and its options for a battleship line. Now, as of we’ve got two Italian battleships in the game – the tier V rebuilt Cavour-class battleship Giulio Cesare, and the tier VIII Littorio-class battleship Roma. Italian battleships are fairly well represented by these two. Italian battleships fall short on AA, and their citadels tend to be somewhat tall (No magic boilers like in the Royal Navy, I guess) – but they’re usually fairly well protected. They’re quite mobile and tend to handle well for their size, and carry powerful, high-velocity guns with questionable accuracy. They tend to be quite stealthy for battleships, but at the cost of range. While I did initially draft out two lines, for this post I decided to only post the ‘main’ line, while I will perhaps make a post on the second at a later date (Spoiler – It’s lots of Ferrati designs - #outquadthefrogs). This main line is essentially the majority of what historical Italian battleships were. Like many Italian designs, speed tended to triumph over armor in order to sustain firepower – in order to defend Italy’s long coastlines from attack, Italian ships had to be able to rapidly deploy against enemy ships, dashing up or down the coast. Likewise, they also stressed artillery performance at range, thus the use of heavier than average shells at infamously high velocities. As a note, I’m not going to try and guess AA suites for B-hulls, but hitpoints would be for a B-hull. Major Line Features: You get: High Speed/Mobility – Generally speaking, these ships will be faster and have better handling than most other battleships Generally good levels of stealth, better than other battleships at the same tier Powerful guns with very high velocities, leading to high penetration, and good gun handling with their fast turret traverse times Unique SAP/AP flavor - Explained below Armor profile starts out as sub-par to mediocre, but becomes very powerful in higher tiers La bella figura– these ships look good. At the cost of; Generally sub-par AA for their tier The main battery range tends to be average to poor The guns share the poor dispersion of German and French battleships, offsetting their ease-of-aim. The main battery lacks HE The health pool of these ships is generally average, but at higher tiers falls behind the competition to a serious degree. They also have relatively high citadels compared to other lines with lower citadels (or physics-bending like the British) The SAP/AP Flavor, and Lack of HE There is only one part of the Italian battleship line’s flavor that can be defined as gimmicky, in the same way the French battleship’s speed boost, the German super-hydro, or British… everything? I’m not even sure where to start with them. This gimmick is that Italian battleships are unable to fire High-Explosive shells from their main battery. Why? Because that’s what the Italians did historically. Unlike their cruisers and destroyers, Italian battleships did not carry HE shells (In Italian; Granata Dirompente – I may refer to this round as ‘GD’ later in this write-up. These shells had an instant fuse and a bursting charge of 5-7% the mass of the shell). Rather, Italian battleship fired two types of Armor-Piercing shells; Palla (or sometimes Proiettile Perforante - PP) – These rounds were the pure Armor-Piercing rounds used by the Italian navy, designed to punch through as much armor as possible, and had small bursting charges of between 1-2% of the shell’s mass. Palla translates to literally ‘ball’, although it can also be used to describe a bullet. Proiettile Perforante would be in a literal sense Piercing Projectile, but the term is analogous to an Armor-Piercing shell in English. These terms describe the same kind of round regardless. This was the primary round to be used against the heavy armor on enemy battleships, and that was essentially their only purpose – the only exception is a curious note from a September 1942 document that advises the use of 320mm Palla against the American Baltimore-class heavy cruisers. This round was used outside of battleships only as the armor-piercing rounds of the 152mm guns used aboard Italian light cruisers. Granata Perforante (GP) – This type of round, with a name that blended that of the two other types of round, is often erroneously dubbed a High-Explosive by English sources (such as navweaps.com, and English translations of Italian books). Their name translating directly as Piercing Shell, these shells were essentially a Semi Armor-Piercing shell, with more explosive power than the pure AP rounds but less penetration, and like the AP used a delay fuse. These shells tended to be about 90% of the mass of Palla, and had on average only about 55-60% of the penetrative potential at most given ranges, but their bursting charges tended to be 2-5% the mass of the shells. This was the general-use round on Italian battleships, and was meant for use against carriers, cruisers, destroyers, and even the lighter armor of some battleships. These rounds also performed as the primary Armor-Piercing ammunition for the 203mm guns of Italian heavy cruisers as well as Italian 120 to 135mm destroyer guns – however performance did vary. As Italian heavy cruisers were still meant to duel and defeat enemy cruisers their shells tended to favor ‘palla’-style performance and had a smaller than average bursting charge, while the destroyers had higher values approaching those of GD rounds, as they were meant for use against very light armor only. An example of the qualitative differences of the two Italian AP types from official documents Essentially, what this boils down to is that Palla is the ‘Anti-Battleship’ round, while Granata Perforante is the ‘whatever else’ shell for Italian battleships, and that’s the flavor that will be reflected in the line. The performance of the round types thus will be as such: Palla (AP)– The same AP shells you’ve always known, these shells have the normal fuse time, and have high penetration. They’re great against battleships, being very punishing even against heavy belts because of their high penetration – however against cruisers, due to that penetration and their velocity retention, this will lead to over-penetrations in many cases. Weaker AP like that found on the 320mm and 305mm Italian guns will still be appropriate for use on cruisers, especially those with heavier armor, as their lower overall penetration and also higher tendency to lose speed (the WWI-era 305mm shells having poor drag performance typical of the era, while the 320mm shells of these guns when re-bored was still rather poor at about 4crh). Granata Perforante (SAP)–These shells will perform differently than regular AP. With higher velocity usually, these lighter shells might feel easier to aim, but they have fundamental differences. They deal less damage than the pure AP, and have much less penetration – they’re not going to do well against the main armor belts of enemy dreadnoughts. They also have short fuses similar to British battleship AP, meaning they’ll have a harder time reaching battleship citadels. However, the combination of less penetration and a shorter fuse time means they’ll tend to over-penetrate cruisers less in the way that Roma’s 381mm Palla does chronically in-game. They’ll also be better for hitting destroyers then regular AP, as well getting regular penetration against the softer areas of battleships that are too angled to penetrate – this will mean excellent damage farming off of German battleships, who’s incremental armor schemes guarantee regular 33% penetrations with ammunition of this type. To compensate for the lack of 'auto damage' that HE gives from raw penetration and fires, these shells have auto-ricochet angles identical to those of Hood's AP - 60° and 67.5°, rather than the normal 45° and 60°> The Tree: Quick Breakdown: III: Cuniberti 17t – Designer Vittorio Cuniberti’s 17000t dreadnought design – the real first dreadnought. IV: Dante Alighieri – Italy’s first dreadnought, Nikolai Iis a Russian version of her. V: Conte di Cavour – The original version of what Cesare’s sister once was, a heavy broadside defines this WWI battleship, with thirteen guns. VI: Caio Duilio – The successor class to the Cavour as rebuilt, this is essentially a better Giulio Cesare. VII: BB1935 – A design that existed beforeLittorio, it uses the 320mm guns in a modern layout with high speed and balanced armor VIII: Littorio – Roma’s sister, she’s similar to Romabut a more comfortable ship with more reliable performance IX: Impero – The third Littorio, this is Littorio as intended, essentially the tier VIII turned up to 10, if the Littorio’s performance was tuned down to 8 (which it kind of is) X: BB1936 – The 406mm design that existed next to Littorio, it was the ultimate expression of Italian battleship design – she’s dwarfed by the tier X BBs of other nations, but is faster, well protected, and has a very strong armament. Tier III – (Cuniberti 17000t) Napoli The design that started it all. The Italian Naval Engineer Vittorio Cuniberti first put his name on the map when he designed the 1901 Regina Elena-class battleships. Pre-dreadnoughts, they had followed the high speed stereotype Italian ships had already gathered for themselves in the latter half of the 1800s, despite the country being so young. At 22 knots, they were the fastest battleships in the world, even after the first dreadnoughts were completed. This, of course, came at the cost of armor (their belt was 250mm, which actually was fairly average for the era). These pre-dreadnoughts were unusual as although their medium battery of guns was exceptionally heavy (6x2 203mm guns, six to a broadside), their heavy battery was very light – only two 305mm/40’s in single turrets, one fore, one aft. The reason for this was more important than one might think, at first glance. The Regina Elena-class in fact had its origins in Cuniberti’s own work, on a 1899 design for a powerful 8000 ton armored cruiser featuring a uniform main battery of twelve 203mm guns, a top speed of 22 knots, and a 150mm belt. It was to be the ultimate Armored Cruiser, faster and better armed than any other. Such a design would ultimately be realized eight years later by the German Kaiserliche Marine in the Armored Cruiser Blücher of 1907 (6x2 210mm, 25 knots, 180mm belt), but not so for the Regia Marina. The design was rejected, and Cuniberti turned it into the 13000 ton ‘battlecruiser’-style Regina Elena-class, whose design philosophy was to be faster than any enemy battleship, and far outgun any enemy cruiser – which it accomplished for its era. Two were built, the Regina Elena and Vittorio Emmanuelle, both laid down in 1901. However, the Italian navy wanted two more battleships, and this time Cuniberti decided to revisit his old concept, and put it on a battleship as he had originally envisioned it – the ‘all-big-gun’ battleship. Thus he took the Regina Elena design to the same place he had taken his armored cruiser design – the ship grew to a displacement of 17000 tons, and featured the single most powerful armament ever put to sea – twelve 305mm guns in four twin and four single turrets. It is important to understand the context in which this came about. Fire Control Systems had come far from their origins, but were still extremely primitive in this era. The range to which they were effective was out to a few thousand yards – massively superior to where they had been only a few decades prior, where a few hundred yards was the extreme limit of naval gunnery. For this reason, the big guns of a battleship were of less use. At the ranges they fought, their main guns had more than enough penetration, and fired slowly. Smaller-caliber weapons still had enough penetration, but could fire faster, and more could be mounted for much less weight. Thus, they were much more effective at closer ranges. However, Cuniberti envisioned that as fire control became better, battles would increasingly be dominated by longer-ranged gunnery from the heavy guns. His ‘all-big-gun’ battleship would simply be able to overwhelm the enemy with large-caliber fire, smashing them under a deluge of heavy shells, and moving on to the next in line. The ships’ own armor would be strong enough to resist enemy fire in return. One of these ships would be worth many of the enemy’s battleships, and six of these would be a force powerful enough to deter any fleet in the world from challenging them. This behemoth was meant to go 24 knots as well, thus being able to run down any major warship in the world – but this is unlikely on a 17000 ton hull, 21 knots being a more realistic speed given the size of machinery of the era. 24 knots would have required a much greater displacement of about 21000 tons. Ultimately the Italian navy rejected the design due to its prohibited cost, but allowed Cuniberti to publish his idea in Jane’s All the World’s Fighting Ships 1903, where he recommended the design be pursued by the British Royal Navy. Meanwhile, the Italian navy built two further Regina Elena’s, laid down in 1903 as Roma and Napoli (hence why I’ve adopted the name Napoli for ours in-game). In May 1905, Cuniberti’s ideas were vindicated. The Russo-Japanese War saw the Battle of Tsushima fought, which was decided primarily by long-range gunnery, at staggering ranges exceeding 5 km reaching all the way to 7 km. The evidence was enough for Britain’s First Sea Lord Admiral Sir John Fisher, who had been exploring the idea of these big-gun ships already. That October, Britain laid down their first all-big gun battleship as the HMS Dreadnought, obsoleting every battleship afloat overnight. Roma, the sister to the Napoli that was ultimately built. Napoli was Italy's last pre-dreadnought battleship. Survivability: 21800 tons – 36600 HP Belt: 305mm belt, 305mm turrets and barbettes Main Armament: 4x2, 4x1 305mm/40 RoF: 2 rpm (30 sec) Dispersion/Sigma: German, 1.8 Traverse: ?º/sec AP: MV: 780mps Mass/Dmg: 417 kg (MaxDmg: 8100) SAP: MV: 780mps Mass/Dmg: 386 kg (MaxDmg: 7800) Secondary Battery: 12x1 76mm/40 Ansaldo 1916 RoF: 15 rpm (4 sec) HE: MV: 680mps Mass/Dmg: 6.5 kg (MaxDmg: 1100, 4% FC) Maneuverability: Engine Power: 50606 shp Top Speed: 24 knots All in all she’s your pretty standard tier III – probably faster than most, but still only having an eight-gun broadside. You’ll be out of it in a second, so I don’t think I need to elaborate on her. Sail around derping eight-gun broadsides into enemy ships, and profit, like any other battleship at this tier. Tier IV – Dante Alighieri … con l’animo che vince ogni battaglia The first Italian dreadnought, the Alighieri was unusual and ambitious. Her design was meant to maximize Cuniberti’s vision, by allowing all of the ship’s main guns to fire to her broadside. She was light for her size, but had a heavy broadside of twelve 305mm guns, with a sub-par 254mm belt and a top speed of 22 knots. She carries the distinction of being the only battleship to ever be named after a Poet, but make no mistake – Dante Alighieri is no mere poet, at least not in Italy. While to most he is the famed author of la Divina Commedia, in Italy he is something more, considered the father of the modern Italian language. La Commedia was one of the first European works written outside of Latin, and Alighieri chose to write it in a Tuscan dialect he referred to as ‘Italian’ – marking one of the first ‘modern’ appearances of the concept as Italy as a nation and an identify. This was grasped onto by the Risorgimento movement, and formed an important pillar of the Italian identity used to unify the peninsula. Laid down on the 9th of June 1909, she was the first battleship to be laid down with its armament mounted in triple turrets, and was completed in 1913. Her career remained uneventful, and despite taking part in the First World War and several Adriatic operations, due to the nature of Adriatic Theater in WWI she never saw action against Austrian dreadnoughts. She served as a testing platform for important gunnery and fire control technologies, and was scrapped in 1928. Her motto, “… con l’animo che vince ogni battaglia” comes from Canto 24 of L’Inferno, words Virgil speaks to Alighieri to boost his moral – the line is usually translated in (modern) English as “...with the spirit that overcomes every battle”. Survivability: 21800 tons – 36600 HP Belt: 254mm between end barbettes, 100mm to bow. Main deck is 50mm with 50mm turtleback slopes, upper deck is 30 or 38mm. 254mm turret faces. Main Armament: 4x3 305mm/46 Modello 1909 (Broadside: 12 guns) RoF: 2 rpm (30 sec) Dispersion/Sigma: German, 1.8 Traverse: ?º/sec AP: MV: 840mps Mass/Dmg: 452 kg (MaxDmg: 8700) SAP: MV: 840mps Mass/Dmg: 401.2 kg (MaxDmg: 8200) Secondary Battery: 4x2, 12x1 120mm/50 Modello 1909 (Broadside: 10) RoF: 6 rpm (10 sec) HE: MV: 850mps Mass/Dmg: 22.1 kg (MaxDmg: 1700, 6% FC) Anti-Aircraft Battery: 4x1 76mm/50 Modello 1909 - 16.8 dps @ 3.00 km 2x1 40mm/39 Vickers 1917 - 11.2 dps @ 2.01 km Maneuverability: Engine Power: 32190 shp Top Speed: 22.8 knots Dante Alighieri is going to look somewhat similar to some people, because of Russia’s own version – the Imperator Nikolai I. While it is true that Italian design did have influence on Russian dreadnought design of the period, it has not actually been indicated by any surviving documents that the Russian 4x3 designs, very similar to the Alighieri, were actually inspired by it, and so such Russian battleship design appears to be an independent development. So, what you should expect from Dante is something of a Nikolai-lite. While less armored, she has similarly powerful guns – a lighter shell (452 kg vs 470.9 kg), but fired at a much higher velocity (840 mps vs 762 mps). She’s got a 1.8 knot speed edge over the Russian dreadnought, but overall weaker armor (270mm belt on Nikolai) and their secondary battery being about equal – both having a 10-gun broadside, the Russian battleship bringing larger 130mm guns while the Italian 120mm guns fire faster. AA armament of both is rather minimal. However, the playstyle will be similar. Despite her thinner armor, Dante is well suited to bow-on tactics, and with three of her four turrets facing forwards, is well suited to swapping fire from port to starboard rapidly, regardless of what her turret traverse may be. Tier V – Conte di Cavour A nessuno secondo The follow-on class to Italy’s first dreadnought, the Cavour-class battleship was meant to be a response to French building, but as Italy lacked a 13.5” (343mm) gun to upgrade to for their battleships, they sought to use an even heavier armament of 12” guns – this time mounting thirteen 305mm rifles. The same as those used on Dante, these had a superior layout, a triple turret with a twin turret super-firing over it both fore and aft, while a single triple turret found a home amidships. Less ambitious in speed, it saw an engine power increase to compensate the increased displacement, and typical of Italian design, to achieve a speed advantage of 1-2 knots over the 20-21 knot dreadnoughts of foreign navies. Armor was slightly improved over the Alighieri, but speed saw a decrease - despite the target speed of 22.5 knots, the top speed was only 22 knots. Cavour was named for the Count of Cavour, Camilo Benso. Prime Minister of Sardinia-Pedimonte, he was instrumental in the formation of Italy as a nation, essentially Italy’s counterpart to Otto von Bismarck. He became the country’s first Prime Minister. Her motto was ‘Second to none’, written by the famous writer, war hero, and eventual proto-fascist Gabriele D’Annunzio. Survivability: 24250 tons – 39500 HP Belt: 250mm between end barbettes, 80mm to bow. Main deck is 50mm with 50mm turtleback slopes, upper deck is 30 or 38mm. 280mm turret faces. Main Armament: 2x2, 3x3 305mm/46 Modello 1909 (Broadside: 13 guns) RoF: 2 rpm (30 sec) Dispersion/Sigma: German, 1.8 Traverse: Dunno lol AP: MV: 840mps Mass/Dmg: 452 kg (MaxDmg: 8700) SAP: MV: 840mps Mass/Dmg: 401.2 kg (MaxDmg: 8200) Secondary Battery: 18x1 120mm/45 Modello 1909 (Broadside: 9) RoF: 6 rpm (10 sec) HE: MV: 850mps Mass/Dmg: 22.1 kg (MaxDmg: 1700, 6% FC) Anti-Aircraft Battery: 6x1 76mm/50 Modello 1909 - 25.2 dps @ 3.00 km 2x1 40mm/39 Vickers 1917 - 11.2 dps @ 2.01 km Maneuverability: Engine Power: 31278 shp Top Speed: 22.3 knots Conte di Cavour is an interesting ship, especially considering that her sister, Giulio Cesare, is Italy’s tier V premium battleship. Well, here’s the thing to keep in mind. Cesare is utterly OP at tier V. It’s outright comedic how well she does, and legend has it that in a lost Canto, Dante places her in the forgotten tenth circle of hell where not even the Devil himself was made to suffer. So we’re not comparing these sisters. No, rather, we’re comparing Cavour to other WWI dreadnoughts like Bretagne, Iron Duke, and König. With an identical turret layout to these ships, they’re pretty easy to compare. König, with her thick belt and turtleback, is by far the most durable, Iron Duke not far behind her, with Cavour trailing and Bretagne in last. Pretty much the same order follows for speed, at 24, 22.5, 22.0, and 21 knots. Firepower is where they vary. The Entente dreadnoughts bring 10x 340/343mm guns firing 2 rpm, and while König brings 10 guns as well, they’re only 305mm guns… but fire faster, at 2.3 rpm. Cavour only fires at 2 rpm with 305mm guns… but has 13 of them. Her penetration should be the best among 12” guns, and the extra three barrels allows her to easily keep up in shell output. Meanwhile, the extra barrels also let her compete with the damage output of the British and French battleships, which she also has more penetration than. Thus, she has similar flexibility to the other battleships with her speed, and although her armor is hardly stellar, it’s adequate. Her main battery is fearsome, thirteen guns throwing heavy shells at high speeds allowing her to hit hard father away then her caliber would seem to suggest. Like many other Italian battleships, her weakness is her mediocre-at-best AA battery, and relatively low health pool for her tier. Tier VI – Caio Duilio Nomen numen The Caio Duilio-class battleships were a follow-on of the prior Cavour-class, and a response to the French Bretagne-class battleships. Since the Regia Marina was satisfied with the prior class and considered them on-par with the Bretagne-class, the Duilio-class ultimately ended up being largely an improved version of the Cavour-class with a revised secondary battery, superstructure, and the decision to accept a lower speed being the primary differences. Caio Duilio was named for the famous Roman admiral Gaius Duilius, who commanded the republic’s fleet at the Battle of Mylae and won Roma’s astounding first naval victory against Hannibal Gisco’s superior Carthaginian fleet. In the inter-war period, as tensions rapidly shot up in the 1930s the Regia Marina began a major revision to its main battleline, which had changed little since the end of the First World War, save for the losses of Dante Alighieri and Leonardo da Vinci and minor modernizations to the battleships as a whole. In response to the French construction of the Dunkerque, the Italian Navy essentially rebuilt the Cavour-class, leaving barely 40% of the original ships behind. As tensions continued to rise, and it became clear that war with Britain was likely, the Regia Marina sought to bring its battleline up to snuff as rapidly as possible, and thus the decision was made to rebuild the Duilio-class in the same radical manner as the Cavour’s. An improved version of the Cavour project, the rebuilding of Caio Duilio and Andrea Doria saw something similar to the Cavour rebuilds, with several notable differences. Like the Cavour-class, their armor was slightly increased, the hull lengthened, and machinery replaced, making the ships capable of 26 knots (one knot slower than the Cavour rebuilds which could make 27 knots, but both classes were still able to force up to 28 knots). The middle turret was removed, and the other guns were bored out from 305/46’s to 320/44’s, greatly increasing their punching power. The Duilio-class had an extra 3º of elevation compared to the Cavourrebuilds giving them an extra 800m of range, but more importantly had a better Fire Control System, making them more capable of engaging targets at range. Their AA battery was far superior to Cavour’s, mounting a battery of 10x1 of the excellent 90mm/50 AA guns rather than the obsolete 100mm/47’s. It also included more 37mm AA guns. Finally, instead of the 6x2 120mm battery of Cavour, Duilio had a 4x3 battery of 135mm guns. Survivability: 24250 tons – 39500 HP Belt: 250mm between end barbettes, 80mm to bow. Main deck is 100mm over magazines, 80mm over machinery spaces, 30mm outboard. A lower portion of deck armor (vertical armor was 70mm) was 74mm thick 24mm turtleback, upper deck is 44mm. 240mm turret faces. Main Armament: 2x2, 2x3 320mm/44 Ansaldo Modello 1936 (Broadside: 10 guns) RoF: 2 rpm (30 sec) Dispersion/Sigma: German, 1.9 Traverse: 5º/sec (36 sec) AP: MV: 830mps Mass/Dmg: 525 kg (MaxDmg: 9300) SAP: MV: 830mps Mass/Dmg: 475 kg (MaxDmg: 8900) Secondary Battery: 4x3 135mm/50 Modello 1937 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 7 rpm (8.57 sec) HE: MV: 825mps Mass/Dmg: 32.7 kg (MaxDmg: 2000, 7% FC) 10x1 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 (Broadside: 5) RoF: 15 rpm (4.0 sec) HE: MV: 860mps Mass/Dmg: 10.1 kg (MaxDmg: 1300, 5% FC) Anti-Aircraft Battery: 10x1 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 - 95.0 dps @ 3.99 km 6x2 37mm/54 Breda 1932 - 69.6 dps @ 3.51 km 3x1 37mm/54 RM 1939 - 26.7 dps @ 3.51 km 8x2 20mm/65 Breda 1935 - 27.2 dps @ 2.01 km Maneuverability: Engine Power: 75000 shp Top Speed: 26.0 knots Special Consumables: Speed Boost - Standard So, what is Caio Duilio at her core? Well, she looks very similar to Cesare on the surface, and… well, simply put, that’s exactly what the case is. The class was originally built very similarly, and the rebuilds followed a similar path. The biggest diversion between the two ships comes in raw speed and secondary/AA firepower. Duilio’s broadside of six 135mm guns hit harder than the six 120mm guns of Cesare… but fires more slowly (7 rpm vs 10 rpm), albeit firing HE rather than AP. The 90mm guns on Doria are more numerous and fire faster, although less damaging (40x 100mm shells per minute versus 75x 90mm shells per minute). Her AA firepower is head and shoulders above that of Cesare, but she’s also one knot slower for her base speed. Given the fact that Cesare is OP as sin at tier V regardless of being uptiered… Caio Duilio makes for a strong contender at tier VI, being fast, stealthy, and still hard-hitting. She’s got the speed and stealth to escape ships that are more powerful than her, and yet she’s fast enough to run down other battleships at similar tiers, as well as chase down cruisers that are doing the wiggles – especially with her speed boost, which allows her to force her engine power in order to reach just over 28 knots (28.08 knots). However, she will struggle more at higher tiers. Being able to meet tier VIII battleships, she will encounter battleships that are faster, better armored, and better armed than her. For this, her great level of stealth inherited from Cesare will need to be exploited. The motto is an ancient Roman phrase that explains itself handily; "The name means power.” Tier VII – (BB1935) Leonardo da Vinci Non si volta chi a stella è fiso ‘BB1935’ finds its origins in one of the 1935 studies for a 26500 ton battleship to counter French construction following their decision to build the Dunkerque. The study called for a 26500 ton battleship armed with main guns of either 305 or 320mm, and a top speed of 30 knots. General Pugliese, who was in charge of the project, went around to over a dozen Admirals in attempt to get a consensus of what was most wanted. Although I’m sure you don’t need me to tell you the obvious, the results were… diverse, to say the least. Layouts varied drastically, using everything from triples to twins to quads. In total some 9 different designs were drawn up, which looked like everything from Nelson to Dunkerqueto reverse King George V... well, you get the idea. Oh, and Admiral de Feo had a design in there too, which is pretty much all you need to know about thatone. The one we’re looking at is one of the larger designs, which managed to grow to 30000 tons. It featured a main battery of 3x3 320mm guns, a top speed of 30 knots, and protection similar to Littorio. The secondary battery included 140mm guns in either triple or quad turrets, but since no 140mm guns existed within the Regia Marina, I’d assume the most likely choice of armament would have been the 135mm/45. The intended TDS system was Pugliese’s own. The name I’m borrowing form the third member of the Conte di Cavour-class battleships, which suffered a magazine detonation in port and was ultimately scrapped after an ambitious yet expensive recovery operation. Unlike some of the other names on this list, I’m sure I don’t need to cover her name, as da Vinci is quite famous and well-known far beyond Italy’s borders. The motto is a quote from the MC himself, which in English usually comes out as “He who is fixed to a star does not change his mind” Survivability: 30000 tons – 46300 HP Belt: 350mm between end barbettes inclined, at 11º, Main deck most likely at least 100mm on 12mm plating with a 36mm on 9mm upper deck. Upper belt perhaps 70mm. Main Armament: 3x3 320mm/44 Ansaldo Modello 1936 (Broadside: 9 guns) RoF: 2 rpm (30 sec) Dispersion/Sigma: German, 2.0 Traverse: 5º/sec (36 sec) AP: MV: 830mps Mass/Dmg: 525 kg (MaxDmg: 9300) SAP: MV: 830mps Mass/Dmg: 475 kg (MaxDmg: 8900) Secondary Battery: 4x3 135mm/45 Modello 1937 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 7 rpm (8.57 sec) HE: MV: 825mps Mass/Dmg: 32.7 kg (MaxDmg: 2000, 7% FC) 12x1 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 15 rpm (4.0 sec) HE: MV: 860mps Mass/Dmg: 10.1 kg (MaxDmg: 1300, 5% FC) Anti-Aircraft Battery: 12x1 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 - 114.0 dps @ 4.50 km 6x2 37mm/54 Breda 1932 - 69.6 dps @ 3.51 km 3x1 37mm/54 RM 1939 - 26.7 dps @ 3.51 km 8x2 20mm/65 Breda 1935 - 27.2 dps @ 2.01 km Maneuverability: Engine Power: 100000 shp Top Speed: 30.0 knots Perhaps best described as a link between Caio Duilio and Littorio, the 1935 mini-Littorio design (Littorino?) combined the firepower of the Italian rebuilds with the speed and protection that the Littorio-class was to have. Littorino would find such an ‘in-between’ playstyle in-game, the first truly tanky Italian battleship, with a similar combination of the tankiness and mobility available to Roma, with a similar AA suite. The main battery, three triple 320mm mounts, would start to sag, the guns being excellent at tier V, comfortably adequate at tier VI, but starting to get long in the tooth at tier VII, where tier IX battleships are a potential opponent. However, this weakness in firepower is the price that will have to be paid for having such a capable hull – 30 knots at tier VII with a hull that’s supposed to be as durable as Roma, and similar anti-aircraft firepower. I’ve also decided to extend the range of the 90mm/50 AA guns to 4.5 km, as: A) 4.0 km range on a tier VII+ BB is just stupid (side glance at Roma) B) This shows the greater performance of the 90mm mounts on Littorio versus Caio Duilio– the smaller battleship’s mounts were simply to close to the waterline and invasion of water was impossible to prevent – thus their RPC systems had to be disabled, while Littorio’s RPC systems remained intact for the 90mm AA guns It’s possibly the guns would need a RoF higher than 2 rpm in order to stay competitive, but as of now I’ve kept it there because I desire to avoid dipping into unrealistic reload times, and 2 rpm is the highest I’ve seen for these guns. Tier VIII – Littorio Molte nemici, molto onore The largest and most powerful class of battleships built by the Italian Navy, the ‘35000 ton’ (standard displacement was in excess of 40000 tons in reality) Littorio-class was a response to France building a second Dunkerque-class battleship and the subsequent breakdown in negotiations of battleship construction that had been taking place between the two nations. The design ended up being a bit of a test bed for the Italian Navy, featuring Pugliese’s torpedo defense system in full, and a new system of armor defense revolving around decapping of Armor-Piercing projectiles. The deck armor system had a 36mm upper deck laminated on 9mm plating to decap incoming shells, while the main deck was either 100mm (machinery) or 150mm (magazines) laminated on 12mm plating. The result was somewhat contradictory – her magazines were probably better protected from deck penetration than those of any other battleship save Yamato, but its machinery deck protection rates as one of the worst of the modern fast battleships, closer to ships like Bismarck and North Carolina than South Dakota, Iowa, Yamato, or Richelieu. However the belt was a different matter, a composite structure consisting of a 70mm homogenous armor decapping plate, a 250mm gap filled with cellulite, and a 280mm belt of Terni Cemented FH armor. The result was a belt that was largely immune to penetration from almost any gun ever put to sea – and even if splinters should result, two layers of splinter bulkheads existed within the ship before the splinters could actually hit the citadel bulkhead itself. The Littorio also mounted the most powerful guns ever mounted on an Italian battleship, the 381mm/50 Modello 1934. Firing an 884.8 kg Armor-Piercing shell at 850mps, and an 824.3 kg SAP shell at 880mps, it was the most powerful 15” rifle ever created, with belt penetration surpassing that of the American 16”/50 Mk.7 (WWII shells) or the Japanese 46cm/45 – although its deck penetration was inferior by a wide margin due to the shallow angles of impact. Although the full engine power was 160,000 shp, a lower operating speed of 128,200 shp was generally used during the wartime, on which she could make 30 knots. In-game, she’s largely a variation of Roma. Littorio was named after the Lictor, the one who would carry the fasces in ancient Rome – the fasces being the symbol of fascism. The motto used an oft-used saying of fascism – “Many enemies, much honor”. Littorio was the only ship of her class to use a motto. In what is probably the most famous picture of the class, Littorio and Vittorio Veneto conduct gunnery exercises together Survivability: 45236 tons – 64300 HP Belt: 375mm between end barbettes inclined at 11º with an internal 40mm bulkhead (yes, I'm keeping the nerfed internal armor, for the sake of balance with Roma), Main deck is 162-112mm with a 45mm upper deck. Upper belt is 70mm. Turret Faces are 380mm sloped at 30º Main Armament: 3x3 381mm/50 Ansaldo Modello 1934 (Broadside: 9 guns) RoF: 2 rpm (30 sec) Dispersion/Sigma: German, 1.8 Traverse: 6º/sec (30 sec) AP: MV: 850mps Mass/Dmg: 884.8 kg (MaxDmg: 12000) SAP: MV: 880mps Mass/Dmg: 824.3 kg (MaxDmg: 11800) Secondary Battery: 4x3 152mm/55 OTO Modello 1936 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 5 rpm (12 sec) AP: MV: 910mps Mass/Dmg: 50 kg (MaxDmg: 3100) 12x1 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 15 rpm (4.0 sec) HE: MV: 860mps Mass/Dmg: 10.1 kg (MaxDmg: 1300, 5% FC) Anti-Aircraft Battery: 12x1 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 - 114.0 dps @ 4.50 km 8x2 37mm/54 Breda 1932 - 92.8 dps @ 3.51 km 4x1 37mm/54 RM 1939 - 35.6 dps @ 3.51 km 8x2 20mm/65 Breda 1935 - 27.2 dps @ 2.01 km Maneuverability: Engine Power: 128200 shp Top Speed: 30.0 knots So, how does Littorio differ from Roma, our already existing premium? In subtle, but telling ways, as she’s not a straight clone. First and foremost, she loses out on durability, with 1100 less hitpoints and a less effective TDS (-10% - and yes, I know I haven't been listing TDS. This is the only time it really mattered). She also trades away her generally ineffective HE for the trademark Italian SAP rounds. She also isn’t as stealthy, visible from 820m further than Roma (from 14.94 km to 15.76 km, or a drop from the fully built 11.22 km to 11.82 km), but also able to fire farther away, base range increasing from 18.12 km to 18.94 km (21.74 to 22.73 km with a spotter aloft). You also have a considerably more capable mid-range AA suite and an extra 500m range on your long-range AA, making you somewhat more capable of defending yourself. With this changes, Littorio will still play similarly to Roma, but with a greater emphasis on staying a little farther away, as well as being less reliant on someone else’s AA. You’re not as stealthy, and torpedoes will hurt you more, not to mention you’ve got slightly less health overall – but at least you’ve got a little more breathing room when it comes to firing back, and you’ve got SAP shells to use so you don’t overpen cruisers quite as often. Tier IX – Impero Laid down as the third Littorio sister but never completed, Impero was one of the ‘second’ generation Littorio-class battleships along with her sister Roma, making the pair somewhat of a slightly different set of siblings… perhaps a second set of twins, if you consider both pairs to be Irish twins? Originally the successors to the Littorio-class would have been the ‘BB1936’ designs (which was adapted into the Ansaldo’s Project 41, which was then sold to the Soviet Union and played an important role in the design of the Projekt 23 Sovetsky Soyuz-class’s design), essentially much larger, 406mm gun armed Littorio’s, but as raw material came harder to come by in the years running up to WWII (due to Allied sanctions), and the need to finish the projects quickly for a 1943/44 war, a second set of slightly improved Littorio’s was chosen instead – Impero laid down in May of 1938, and Roma four months later. Impero, as I’m choosing to represent her here, is the Littorio-class unleashed. As we know it in-game (Roma), the class underperforms in many aspects, especially protection (many of the interior bulkheads scrapped) and the efficiency of the main belt, 375mm in game… which is a fraction of what it was capable. While technically speaking the MAB’s strength is a blank check (decapping against Face-Hardened is different then against homogenous – essentially if you decap the shell, it’s just going to either fail to penetrate, or just shatter, unless it’s of sufficient caliber. You’d need a 470mm shell to actually guarantee punching through Littorio’s belt), we do have one strength figure – able to resist her own shells at 16 km through tests. In-game, Roma has just over 490mm of penetration at this range. Likewise, the engine only operates at about 80% power in-game, compared to its 160000 shp full output. On top of that output, it was able to boost power by a further 12% in emergency situations – getting you just short of 180000 shp. In terms of their actual ability, Littorio somewhat straddles the line between tier VIII and IX with our in-game system – her biggest drawbacks are the raw dpm cap of only nine 381mm guns at tier IX, the low health, and the weak AA… but her protection, speed, and absurd penetration balance this out considerable. Impero (lit. “Empire” in English) was named for the new ‘Italian Empire’ proclaimed by Mussolini. Survivability: 45236 tons – 64300 HP Belt: 420mm between end barbettes inclined at 11º with an internal 36mm bulkhead, with a 24mm bulkhead ~4 meters further inside the hull. Main deck is 162-112mm with a 45mm upper deck. Upper belt is 70mm. Turret Faces are 380mm sloped at 30º Main Armament: 3x3 381mm/50 Ansaldo Modello 1934 (Broadside: 9 guns) RoF: 2.14 rpm (28 sec) Dispersion/Sigma: German, 2.0 Traverse: 6º/sec (30 sec) AP: MV: 850mps Mass/Dmg: 884.8 kg (MaxDmg: 12000) SAP: MV: 880mps Mass/Dmg: 824.3 kg (MaxDmg: 11800) Secondary Battery: 4x3 152mm/55 OTO Modello 1936 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 5 rpm (12 sec) AP: MV: 910mps Mass/Dmg: 50 kg (MaxDmg: 3100) 12x1 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 15 rpm (4.0 sec) HE: MV: 860mps Mass/Dmg: 10.1 kg (MaxDmg: 1300, 5% FC) Anti-Aircraft Battery: 12x1 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 - 114.0 dps @ 4.50 km 8x2 37mm/54 Breda 1932 - 92.8 dps @ 3.51 km 4x1 37mm/54 RM 1939 - 35.6 dps @ 3.51 km 8x2 20mm/65 Breda 1935 - 27.2 dps @ 2.01 km Maneuverability: Engine Power: 160000 shp Top Speed: 32.0 knots Impero becomes Roma on steroids. Or rather, she’s Roma, but without a broken ankle and a few cracked ribs. She’s fast at 32 knots, second only to the 32 knot + speed boost French battleships and the American battleships Iowa and Missouri. Her armor gives her fantastic resistance – the 70mm upper belt and 45mm upper deck giving very good protection against HE spam, and her defense against AP being out of this world. Her 420mm/11º main armor belt (the thickness being a compromise) is quite strong, allowing her to resist her own shells at just past 18.5 km broadside, and angled at only 30º she can resist her own shells at 15 km, the American 16”/50 within 16 km, and the Japanese 18.1”/45 at just over 19 km… without taking into account her internal bulkheads, and her thin citadel, despite how thin it is… because WG removed her innermost citadel bulkhead… Blue is actual, green is the current citadel. Even if they punch through the main belt, it’s almost impossible for any short fuse (hi, Royal Navy) BBs to thus hit the citadel – which means it has to be travelling at least 164mps. Shooting a broadside Impero at 10 km or greater with the French 380/45 would penetrate the belt, sure (well, until you hit 18 km) – but the shell won’t actually reach the citadel. You’ve got to be within 10 km to still have enough time to hit the belt before the shell’s fuse runs out after going through the main belt and first splinter bulkhead. In terms of firepower, she uses the same guns as Roma, but this time comes with 2.0 sigma, and a 28 second reload – somewhat offsetting the fact that you’re somewhat hurt by autobounce and having just nine barrels (Alsace still had similar caliber-weapons, but has twelve of them!). In terms of her actually getting hits, however, she should be fine. Alsace generally averages higher rates of hitting than Richelieu(7.9 shells per minute versus Richelieu’s 4.9 rpm), but that’s only a product of having 12 vs 8 guns and access to the RoF module. Without said module, it drops to 7 shells per minute, and with only 8 guns this would be 4.6 shells – Richelieu’s higher sigma (1.8 vs 1.7) coming into play. Roma, with 1.8 sigma, averages 5.4 shells. Keeping that sigma would give you 5.8 spm, 6.6 spm with the reload module. With 2.0 sigma, you’re easily seeing a similar number of shells as what Alsace achieves… and the 381/50’s AP is stronger than that of the 380/45. She’s Roma turned up to 12. Her AA is still anything but stellar, but it’s at least somewhere just under ‘on-par’ for tier IX. She’s fast, she’s durable, and she still hits hard – just more often. Tier X – (BB1936) Piave The ultimate evolution of the Italian battleship, ‘BB1936’, often known as UP.41 (Ufficiale Progetto 41 by Ansaldo’s nomenclature), this wasn’t so much an evolution past Littorio so much as it was the original idea. The Littorio’s design work was largely done under the jurisdiction of the WNT, which limited battleship design to 35000 tons standard displacement with an armament not exceeding 406mm. Naturally, just as every country had rushed to design a ship fitting the most 203mm (maximal caliber) guns as possible on a 10000 ton hull with their heavy cruisers, they did the same as with the battleships. This evolution was part of the same process that lead to Littorio, but the designers struggled as they felt it was too difficult to for nine 406mm guns on a sufficiently protected hull and get it to go 30 knots under an operational load. The weight reduction in terms of armament from choosing lower caliber weapons, in combination with the relative ease of developing new 381mm guns versus 406mm guns, lead them to shrink the armament down to ‘only’ nine 381mm guns as the project developed into what eventually became Littorio. However, development did not stop there, as Ansaldo continued to play with the design, and it grew, BB1936 being the ultimate product of these efforts, a 45000 ton vessel. However, the design did not take advantage of the more advanced protection methods used in Littorio’s armoring (such as the composite belt). Ultimately, as war came ever closer, despite the effort made to upgrade the Navy’s facilities to build and operate these large ships, it was decided to go with a repeat of the Littorio-class for the next battleship order (and thus Impero and Roma were ordered). However, Ansaldo had also sold the design to Russia, as UP.41 – with heavy modification to Russian preferences, and without the Pugliese TDS. This is the project we have data for, but needless to say it varies significantly from any design that would’ve succeeded Littorio. So, stat-wise, that is why I will try to recreate (including a composite belt, to explain the increased thickness). Her name is an interesting leap of logic for me – while personally speaking I’d love to name her Giuseppe Garibaldi, the fact of the matter is that A) by tradition only cruisers bared his name and B) By this period battleships were no longer named after people – that went out with the rise to power of the Fascists. Thus, the names of Italian battleships afterwards usually had to do with the glory of fascism (Littorio), a new Roman Empire (Impero), while Roma had a somewhat less neutral name, being named after the eternal city of Rome itself, although that still had ancient connotations to bit, as Rome always will. However, one of these ships had a name that that did not call back to a long-ago past, or a new fascist age. One ship had a name that simply spoke to Italy, the relatively young nation that existed here and now – the one that actually mattered. This was the Vittorio Veneto, named after the major victory achieved by Italy over Austria in 1918 that brought down the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Such a name was a powerful symbol that spoke more about a modern Italy – the one that mattered – than any name harking to some militaristic past or future that involved the subjugation of foreign nations. The Battle of Vittorio Veneto marked an important moment in Italian history – the final defeat, after hundreds of years of struggle, of the Hapsburg Empire, who had dominated Italy for about half a millennium. The victory not only avenged the defeat at Caporetto a year earlier, but also the centuries of foreign rule suffered by the Italian states. Thus the name I decided to go with was named after an earlier battle, but equally important, fought not long after Caporetto. Fought a little over 100 years ago, the Battle of the Piave River was where Italian troops halted and broke the Austrian offensive after the route at Caporetto. This was done in spite of the fact the Entente powers insist they fall further back, as they did not believe the Piave could be held... But hold it did. The Austrians were beaten back again on the Piave when they attempted their last offensive with a counter-attack launched 100 years ago today, and the utter defeat of this effort marked the first point where the Central Power’s command staff realized the war was beginning to end, despite the triumphs of 1917. Piave, although typically unanimously ignored by histories outside of Italy, stood as an important moment, a 20thcentury Legnano, and because of that I think that such a name is appropriate for Italy’s tier X battleship. Survivability: 49506 tons – 69300 HP Belt: 450mm between end barbettes inclined at 11º with an internal 36mm bulkhead, with a 24mm bulkhead ~4 meters further inside the hull. Main deck is 162mm with a 55mm upper deck. Upper belt is 150mm. Turret Faces are 400mm sloped at 30º Main Armament: 3x3 406mm/56 Ansaldo Modello 1936 (Broadside: 9 guns) RoF: 2.0 rpm (30 sec) Dispersion/Sigma: German, 2.0 Traverse: 6º/sec (30 sec) AP: MV: 850mps Mass/Dmg: 1350 kg (MaxDmg: 14800) SAP: MV: 870mps Mass/Dmg: 1100 kg (MaxDmg: 13500) Secondary Battery: 4x3 152mm/55 OTO Modello 1936 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 5 rpm (12 sec) AP: MV: 910mps Mass/Dmg: 50 kg (MaxDmg: 3100) 12x2 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 15 rpm (4.0 sec) HE: MV: 860mps Mass/Dmg: 10.1 kg (MaxDmg: 1300, 5% FC) Anti-Aircraft Battery: 12x2 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 - 160.8 dps @ 4.50 km 24x2 37mm/54 Breda 1932 - 378.4 dps @ 3.51 km 4x1 37mm/54 RM 1939 - 35.6 dps @ 3.51 km 24x2 20mm/65 Breda 1935 - 81.6 dps @ 2.01 km Maneuverability: Engine Power: 180000 shp Top Speed: 32.0 knots Alright, so I lied. This is not quite true to BB1936. That design intended to use a 406/50, with characteristics similar to the Russian 406mm/50 B-37, which the Italians helped develop. The planed 406/50 was to extend the given range of penetration compared to the 381/50 gun by 2000 meters – meaning it far exceeded any other gun that actually saw service in raw power. This ship doesn’t use that gun. Instead, this ship uses the monstrous 406mm/56 that was considered for the 4-16/16-40, a monstrous design that was intended to mount sixteenof these guns on a hull with 406mm of steeply inclined hull armor, and a top speed of 29 knots. The gun is your Vittorio Veneto, with the ability to rip through just short of 700mm of armor at 20 km, even the most heavily armored battleships will struggle to protect themselves from these guns, the raw penetrative power of a 1350-kilogram projectile fired at an initial muzzle velocity of 850 meters per second more than making up for the smaller caliber and the low gun count for that caliber. The raw kinetic force behind its armor-piecing gives it as high a damage potential as Yamato’s monstrous 460mm guns, and the SAP as much as American SHS! With the ridiculous velocity retention of such heavy shells, you’ll likely have issues over-penetrating cruisers just with your SAP shells – these might just be a more viable weapon than your AP at closer ranges against battleships! If your offensive armament is your Vittorio Veneto, then your armor is your Piave, because it’s a tough nut to crack. With 450mm of armor inclined at 11º, your belt is essentially 18” before angle of fall is even considered. Such a belt is seriously thick, and you retain the series of internal bulkheads to keep your citadel safe from stray rounds and the like. Angled at 45º, even Yamato’s 460mm APC won’t penetrate the belt by itself beyond 11 km. Your thick main armor deck is highly resistant to AP bombers, while your overall HE protection is improved. With a 55mm upper deck, even German 203mm HE will shatter on it, as will regular HE up to 330mm. IFHE will need to be greater than 254mm to penetrate it, and higher-penetration HE with IFHE will need to be 170mm or greater. Your 150mm upper belt provides significant protection against destroyers and light cruiser AP, and is immune to HE and IFHE of any penetration type. Even your AA protection isn’t terrible, although nor is it fantastic. Adequate is the best way to describe it. And if your armor is your Piave, then your mobility is your Carica della Savoia Cavalleria, because it’s going to get you out of (and into) trouble. Able to make 32 knots, you’re in the fastest tier X battleship, and because of your relatively small size, you’re probably able to turn much better than any other tier X battleship, too, handling more like a tier VIII than anything else. This will combine well with your good stealth. Exploit this brutally. However, that brings us on to the final point, which is your endurance. Watch how far you extend yourself, or it will be your Caporetto. You pack a huge wallop offensively, you’re fast, and you’re well armored, a tough nut to crack. However if that nut is cracked? Well, you’re light, and that means you’ve got a fairly small healthpool. You’re sitting on less than 70000 health at a tier where the lightest competitor has 82900 health, over 10000 more than you. That’s the price you pay for this unusual combination of characteristics. The Line overall So how does the line overall bring something new to WoWs? A good line can’t just be ‘more stuff’. It should bring something new to the table, and ideally do it without relying on a crazy gimmick, such as a super heal or speed boost. Nor should it rely on incredibly unrealistic rebuilding (side glance at Normandie and Lyon), or massive buffs to shell penetration (side glance at French 305 and 340mm guns). The Italian battleships start out being fairly unique from the start. While Napoli is fairly standard for a tier III battleship, SAP rounds aside, Dante Alighieri immediately takes you for something unique – a unique armament layout allowing you to bring twelve powerful 305mm barrels to bear against enemy ships at a tier where most ships can only manage ten barrels at best. Your armor is less than most of your foes, but your speed is better than most. Conte di Cavouris your last dance with a WWI-era battleship, which is a nice development – most nations don’t ditch the WWI battleships until tier VII. She again stresses a powerful broadside, boasting thirteen barrels to a broadside, and very nice firing angles – the lower turrets can traverse ±150º, and the superfiring turrets ±155º - past autobounce angles! The amidships ‘Q’-turret, meanwhile, rotates a full 360º. The armor and speed are hardly spectacular, armor being average to sub-par for the tier, and unlike before, where only the Japanese battlecruisers beat Dante in speed at tier IV – at tier V, Cavour is only about as fast as Iron Duke – well behind Kongo and Cesare, and an appreciable gap between her and König. At tier VI you start to push into the higher-tier face of the Italian battleship line, and playstyle starts to become more unique. Higher speeds with better handling, punchier guns with fast traverse and fairly sneaky for you tier. Your healthpool also starts to look a little short. However, you’re still carting over the poor armor of your predecessor with a citadel a deck over the waterline, and you’re not that fast. Both French tier VI battleships are faster than you, as is Mutsu, and Bayern’s only behind by a knot. However, with speed boost active, only the French battleships are faster than you. Tier VIII battleships will be a major threat given your low health and poor armor, and the fact that many are faster than you. Your AP is punchy, however – you’ve got more penetration than Bayern’s 380mm guns! Use your stealth to get where you need to be, and surprise enemies with powerful AP volleys. You’re probably not going to want to directly fight many other tier VI or VII battleships, but you can certainly hold your own against them. In tier VIII games, play in support of cruisers and destroyers, using your SAP rounds to gut targets most battleships would simply overpenetrate. At tier VII, you’ll be finding yourself having to do something similar, albeit with much, much thicker armor and a full 30 knots – no more speed boost, however! This puts you ahead of most, ultimately – tied only with Ashitaka and 2 knots behind Hood and Gneisenau. With a 2.0 sigma, however, your shells are going to be quite accurate, so good aim will be rewarded. As a famous American admiral said; Hit hard, Hit fast, Hit often. Your guns will be feeling fairly anemic by this point, comparing poorly to the other guns of tier VII battleships, so speed, stealth, and armor must be exploited ruthlessly in order to come out on top. Finally at tier VIII you hit Littorio. With it’s powerful, high-velocity guns and strong belt, those familiar with Roma will be at home, although the Littorio trades TDS for better AA, especially with upgrades adding to light AA. Unlike Roma, while Littorio lacks HE, its SAP rounds help it significantly to aid with one of Roma’s major issues with her main battery – chronic overpenetration of light armor. With still well over 200mm of penetration at 20 km, the 381mm SAP rounds and their shorter fuses make ideal weapons for shots against cruisers, or the upper works of angled battleships, while the AP shells will simply punch through almost any battleship armor one might expect to find in her MM range. At 30 knots you’re in the average for tier VIII battleships, but your handling is still slightly above average for the 30-knot+ club. Tier IX gives you quite a gem. Impero is a capable battleship, using the same guns but with much-improved sigma and a slight RoF boost (to 28 seconds – about the fastest RoF at loading angle the guns achieved that is known of). She’s also 2 knots faster, and has a thicker armor belt – whereas in-game Roma is proof against her guns at 22 km and beyond, Impero is proof at ranges of 18.7 km and beyond – still not quite the 16 km figure the belt was rated at (this would require a 462mm/11º belt), but still quite powerful – a moderate angle of 30º will see you safe from the American 16”/50 Mk.7 at beyond 15 km, and even Yamato’s monster 460mm guns can’t penetrate your belt from outside of 24 km, or about 19 km at a 30º angle. This drops to 13 km at 45º. However, you do pay for this with lower than average health for the tier. Tier X gives you the pinnacle of the line, Piave. This tier X battleship has stupidly strong guns and its main AP rounds may be seldom used due to the ridiculous penetration, able to punch past the belts of even well angled tier X battleships at the range of 20 km. The gun averages 9-10” more penetration at a given range than the vaunted American 16”/50 Mk.7, the most powerful 406mm gun to ever see service. At sub-5 km ranges, this 406mm Palla can penetrate over a meter of armor. Your own armor isn’t too shabby, 450mm of inclined armor, the most powerful belt at tier X. However, you’re light for your tier, and you don’t have the power of overmatch over 30mm+ plating – with only nine guns to boot! Using your stealth, speed, handling, and armor to survive will be vital to success, as otherwise damage will stack up rapidly. Thus while the lower tiers may feel very vanilla – a high gun count, but otherwise a familiar story aside from the lack of HE – the mid and higher tiers adopt their own unique flavor. Mid tiers are more modern and faster than many counterparts, but often just don’t compare in the armor department, and start to look a little underweight. This is somewhat of an experimental version of the tree, but I wanted to try it because I tend to like avoiding paper where possible, and I also though the 406/56 was simply too awesome not to use. So I do acknowledge that the tree does have other options for tier IX & X. For example, Deamon93’s version sees BB1936/UP.41, with the 406/50, at tier IX, with tier X being an unknown – the 4-16/16-40 somewhat being a placeholder due to the fact it would be absurdly overpowered in-game. That being said, there are easily other options if WG fudges it like the last three tier X BBs – a 10-gun BB with either 406mm gun would work well if still fast and well armored, using the iconic gun layout of the Abruzzi-class and the rebuilt battleships. It would also not be unrealistic to see on a modern Italian battleship – at one point this familiar layout was considered for Littorio in order to equally divide firepower fore and aft. Obviously, that route was not taken, due to weight concerns. Likewise, I should point out – the weight for many of the SAP rounds are guesstimated. I only have data for the 320mm and 381mm Granata Perforante, so I could only guess based on those shells for those that equip other guns. So, what do you guys think? As always, constructive criticism is welcome (and I'm sure I'll hear it on the tier X...). Happy Hunting!
  14. OKIES_NAVY

    GERMAN CV's?

    I'm confidant this is about the last topic you'd care to hear about or more likely hear more about. I have to believe WOW has lost its way introducing German CV's to a game who hasn't seen an Italian Battleship or Destroyer line. Lines of ships that actually existed in history being pre-empted by a line of exclusively, save one, paper ships simply boggles the mind. Is there an Earth shaking demand for German CV's? Not only are you bringing to life paper ships but you are also endowing them with paper super weapons. Mind you the Germans had a guided missile, of sorts, but it was never launched from a CV. Perhaps that's another little surprise we have to look forward to in the future? To add insult to injury two of the three dominant Navies of WWII are withering on the vine. The USN and IJN are being power creeped into obscurity with only premium ships providing any grace what so ever. The Brits are having issues themselves. I have to assume these are purely business decisions. The NA player numbers is far from huge and I'm sure the number of Italian players is dwarfed by those from Russia. The only reason I'm doing this now is because I failed to include it in the after clan season survey. I felt it didn't really belong there any way.
  15. So, yesterday WG removed Gorizia, Yudachi, Poltava and Cheshire, isnt there newcomers to the premium shop? Or some ships from the past? Usually the shop remains with less ships? There isnt a replacement?
  16. Heyo all, I've been wanting to publish this piece for some time, but wanted to wait until I have 100 games in her so I would have a proper game count to present. I am only at 94 games, but I hope that this won't undermine the guide. I think I can claim to know what I am talking about when it comes to this ship. Abruzzi has a very negative reputation on the NA server as a bad premium ship which is badly in need of buffs. While she is by no means an overpowered ship, I feel like her reputation is not quite deserved. More do I think that she is very much misunderstood by the community and overshadowed by amazing T7 Premiums like Belfast and Flint. The typical CL gameplay being that of an HE spammer makes matters somewhat worse for her. This writeup serves the purpose of giving insight into how I see her characteristics after a fair amount of games, and how one can best use them to their advantage. Firepower Abruzzi’s firepower is all sorts of underwhelming. Her HE dpm is lacking compared to the HE flingers at her tier, the AP does not hit hard enough for anything beyond normal pens against sides or citadels against soft targets up close and the torpedoes feel like a gimmick more than anything. It takes work to deliver proper results with Abruzzi. Something touched later upon is her concealment. While it’s not directly related to her firepower, it allows Abruzzi to get closer to the enemy and land shots better than someone who would be forced to stay at range, like Shchors for example. This also makes it easier to get access to a broadside that can be abused with her mediocre AP. Her range is fairly limited with only 15.1km, however the access to a Spotter Aircraft permits Abruzzi to temporarily increase her reach to 18.1km which in an uptiered match is a big relief. Another problematic feature with her main battery lies in her firing angles. Towards the rear they are very close to 30° for a full broadside, being supportive of kiting, but forward facing the X-turret really lacks, which means that when sailing towards an opponent it is very risky to get the last two guns to fire. Doing so requires timing regarding the enemies reload. Graphic taken from https://gamemodels3d.com/games/worldofwarships/vehicles/pisc507 The torpedoes are typical sea mines, they are not fast, they have a long reach and reload reasonably fast. Whenever you see a chance to dump them into the general direction of your enemy, do so. They won’t deliver consistent results, but as area denial tools and for the occasional surprise hit they are good. Survivability The Italian Tier VII cruiser is a ship of the extremes, her survivability is both strong and weak at the same time. To understand this, we must first dive down into what she brings to the table, and what she lacks. This view is nothing new, it shows Abruzzi’s citadel and its important features. 1. It’s huge. It extends high above the waterline with armor values that are not sufficient to protect you from incoming fire unless you bounce the shots. 2. It is box-shaped. So unlike the likes of New Orleans, Helena or Myoukou, the citadel deck is flat without any steps up or down. This is very important to note. What can one take from this? If Abruzzi shows side, she explodes. There is no if or but, she simply does. Yet at the same time it makes Abruzzi a ship with surprising resilience when angled properly. A well angled Abruzzi can only take a citadel hit when a shell entered through the rear or frontal bulkhead, which is easy to avoid when actively maneuvering. On top of that thanks to her high citadel she has a (in comparison) large surface covered by her belt system, which will bounce every BB shell thrown at her. What remains are mostly overpenetrations with an occasional normal penetration. And here her Repair Party comes into play, because unlike all but two T7 cruisers Abruzzi, actually has a heal. Her hitpool for a Tier VII cruiser is on the lower end of the spectrum. Only Shchors, Atlanta, Flint and Fiji are below her. This plays into the vulnerability when showing broadside. It doesn’t take much damage to delete her. In conclusion, Abruzzi’s survivability relies heavily on how the shells hit her. If she is angling against those shells the damage she takes will be minimal, while she can also recover from the minor damage dealt. But if caught in a bad spot you’ll return to port within seconds. Concealment This is the area where Abruzzi truly shines. Her surface detection is nothing short of amazing, only getting outspotted by the totally not broken Belfast as well as the Atlanta sisters. Not only does this allow her to have a rather situational ability to stealth torp, but it gives her the edge in many engagements by being able to engage and disengage on her own terms. Maneuverability For a ship with Abruzzi’s playstyle one would expect superb maneuverability. But this is not the case, both her turning circle and rudder shift are at best average compared to the competition, with her speed being on the higher end. This means that one has to be even more careful when playing, because unlike a Fiji this lady takes her sweet time to turn. Installing the Steering Gears Modification to make her rudder shift acceptable is highly recommended. Playstyle Making Abruzzi work is a matter of finding the right balance between playing up close to increase the damage output and at the same time staying alive. Given the fragile nature of this ship when overextended and the lack of a get-out-of-jail card this means that she does not forgive you for mistakes. What is important to note is that she is not a ship that will deliver you large damage numbers. For such tasks USN and Soviet light cruisers are better suited. The primary role should be to have a destroyer 4km ahead of you to spot for you and to avoid getting caught pants down by a DD. At the same time you need to support your allied DDs by dropping a few HE salvos on the enemy DDs, which with the relatively close distance is a piece of cake. I can not stress enough how much impact a 5k salvo can have on a DD. We are talking about eradicating a third of an Akatsuki’s healthpool in one salvo, and 7.5 seconds later you can add some on top. This can swing a match in your favor in the first few minutes, provided you executed the maneuver properly and did not get yourself nuked by overextending. Trades against cruisers are to be taken. The superior concealment means that you can almost always pick the engagement, so you can turn away and open up. The soft damage they deal in return can easily be mitigated with the Repair Party. Battleships, if you must engage them, should be enjoyed from a distance of around 13km. Just like against cruisers you go ahead and turn away, fling HE while kiting away and ensure that no returning shell gets through the rear bulkhead while enjoying the bounces on your main belt/the normal- and overpenetrations of your upper casemate. Especially against battleships using the throttle can bring impressive results, making them miss most of their salvos. If you do happen to take an uncomfortable amount of damage it is a matter of 20 seconds to disengage into stealth and recover some health, and then start all over again. Don’t be afraid of abusing the spotter aircraft when you are low health already and play the Damage over Time game. Against carriers you are screwed. Don’t try to gamble on something by installing any sort of AA improvements. No need for Defensive Fire, it’s not worth it. Outfitting Abruzzi Abruzzi does not demand anything spectacular for her captain and modules. Her captain is fairly standard for a light cruiser at that tier, with the only difference being Superintendent as she has access to the Repair Party consumable which is important to capitalize on. Created using http://shipcomrade.com/captcalc If you do not have a 19 point captain to spare, the recommended order is: Priority Target, Adrenaline Rush, Demolition Expert, Inertia Fuse for High Explosive, Concealment Expert, Superintendent, Expert Marksman. The modules follow suit, nothing spectacular waiting here. With dodging and maneuvering being key to Abruzzi’s survival, the health of your rudder and the speed at which you can initiate a turn are crucial. It is important that you do not even pretend that you are buffing your AA. It won't work. As for signal flags, your main concern should be increasing the impact of the repair party and increasing your speed. The rest can either be used to give a minor boost to your fire chance, or to equip economy signals to train the captain faster. As for the consumables, the most important ones are your Damage Control and the Repair Party. Premium versions of the two are highly recommended. If you wish, you can also increase the use that you can squeeze out of the Hydroacoustic search consumable and the Spotter plane, though former is more useful than the latter. Again, Abruzzi might have access to the Defensive Fire consumable, but it is not worth it. The spotter aircraft will deliver five times the value, even when used in its non-Premium version. In conclusion If you seek a ship that quickly creates huge numbers with little to no effort required, then you came to the wrong place. Abruzzi is a ship for those that are willing to invest map awareness, positioning and angling, and will reward the player if every criteria has been fulfilled. If during a match you were deleted, analyse what went wrong. In almost all cases it was a player's mistake that resulted in the unfortunate ending, so take note on how to improve. Cheers~
  17. Presenting the all new T10 Italian's cruiser, Venezia. Masterly crafted and design by expert Italians shipbuilder. Encompassing sleek and modern design with speed to match of up to 38 knots. She include the iconic Italian Red and White candy cane paint on her bow and sporting detailed craftsmanship on her exterior design. Using the all new SAP shell technology in a 5x3 configuration for simultaneous 15 shell barrage onto target at sonic speed. Her AA suite is top of the class and will satisfy your needs to protect your precious asset from any would be airstrike. Safety is our number one priority and we ensure your crew will stay safe with our patent pending Exhaust smoke technology to get you out of troubling situation when the need arises complimented by sea mines for any pursuing target that may seek interest in your brand new investment. Get your today at the nearest Regia Marina certified Shipyards for a low cost of 19,900,000 credits. Please provide us with feedback below so that we ensure that your next vehicle of transports, is a Regia Marina's ships. Enjoy future captain, and may she serve you well. Venezia Commercial.mp4
  18. I highlight the main details of World of Warships update 0-8-10 - and how to maximize the containers and tokens you can earn to give you the best chance to complete the new Italian collection: Resolute and rapid in this update to attain the Excellent unique Italian commander: Luigi Sansonetti. Good luck, I hope this helps! Kar
  19. rafael_azuaje

    Gnenova NEED Buff

    Currently, the Italian Genoa cruise is very rubbish, because it is a weak cruise with the worst main battery, it has a battleship recharge, there is no cruise in the game with 20 seconds of recharging. The very high turret turn that makes it impossible to have a Battle against a destroyer. Defense weapon that are torpedoes are very useless in T5, because they are extremely slow and with very low damage. their SAP & AP shells are basically the same both cause appointment, they should replace the AP with the HE. Every T5 cruiser is always equipped with hydroacoustics, it can carry defensive AA or smoke. slightly improve the shielding is too weak the genova need BUFF IN: 1- remove AP shells for HE 2-keep SAP shells 3-fix reload main Guns 20 secs to 13 secs 4-ADD HYDRO or smoke , all cruiser T5 has hydro. 5- the torpedoes need up damage becuase 9xxx is nothing vs a BB I think that it make better genova. if someone supports me in this ideas well, and if not tell me why?
  20. First, just a quick disclaimer. I'm so damn frustrated at just how terrible and unforgiving these ships are that this is probably gonna be a total mess of a post. The low-tiered Italian cruisers are absolutely pathetic. The ships themselves are mediocre, but the armament they're given is just so damn awful that its a total slugfest. These are the characteristics of the available ships, with the exception of the Genova. Tier 5: Tier 6: Tier 7: Tier 8 (and probably Tier 9 and Tier 10 since they use the same gun): (Since the Tier 9 and Tier 10 stats aren't available in game, I will post links to the wiki pages for the two ships so you can make your own comparisons and judge whether or not you want to grind this absolutely terrible line) T9: https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Brindisi T10: https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Venezia The ships are very agile and put some destroyers to shame with their speed, but then you have to deal with these terrible turrets that are slow to turn on target and keep up with your turn. Once you fire, the shells have a lazy arc (at the lower tier) so you have to lead even the slow battleships at 6-7 notches. The SAP shells are horribly inconsistent and struggle to do anything against battleships. These shells also have absolutely TERRIBLE pen, 54 millimeters at Tier 8, that even destroyers with the slightest bit of angling will bounce or shatter your shells. Yes, these shells will slap destroyers that go broadside, but any competent DD player will know to angle against Italian ships, or any ship for that matter. The Genova is in a league of its own. The ship is just so awful, I would prefer to get everything BUT it. 20 second reload on a cruiser with 152 millimeters guns is so horrible, I'd rather hang myself than play it. Seems like you're insinuating that Italy has some of the weakest men in the loading room known on planet Earth. Here's the biggest slap in the face; 104 shell hits yet a measly 38,958 damage. Even destroyers and small caliber cruisers will do more damage with the same amount of hits. The torpedoes are mediocre. They deal decent damage, but with so few, it's highly improbable that even a half health New York will die to a salvo of the Montecuccoli's torpedoes. They have good range at ten kilometers, but they're so damn slow that they pretty much are only useful for ambushing. With that being said, the detection is so bad that you'll get spotted going behind whatever cover you want from halfway across the map and since the torpedoes are so slow, any decent destroyer player will be able to speed right through them. If you like the speediness of the Italians; I suggest the Henri or the Zao. Both ships have HE that smacks and with a high fire chance, they can actually deal damage. The Venezia has the second weakest torpedoes at Tier 10 among cruisers at only 13900 damage and with only three per side, even cruisers can take all three and live. If you like the high arc on the shells; I suggest the Worcester, Des Moines, or Minotaur. The Worcester has spammable HE that is quite consistent with IFHE and the Des Moines has Super-Heavy AP that will slap even battleships. The Minotaur has the short-fused AP that will wreck destroyers and with the spammableness, it will do very well against battleship superstructures. If you like smoke; I suggest Minotaur, and for the sheer brokenness, the Smolensk. The Smolensk is an HE spammer with torpedoes that deal more damage and two extra tubes per side. The Minotaur is a jack-of-all trades. It can do well against battleships, smash cruisers and destroyers and if you squad up with destroyers or other ships with smoke, you can slot radar and decimate anyone that dares get close. TL;DR The line is terrible and if they don't receive buffs to the pen of the SAP shells, it's not worth playing. Skip this line if it comes out as is. I wouldn't wish these absolutely trash ships on anyone. For the first time, WarGaming have actually released a series of ships that were underpowered. I'm not even Italian and I feel like this is a total insult to the real Regia Marina. Edit: I just want to clear something up. The ships themselves are perfectly fine. They have a mixture of speed and agility to make them super good flankers, mixed with the walking smoke to make them perfect for getting in, hitting some things then getting out. My issue is with the armament. The SAP shells are too inconsistent and struggle to pen anything that angles, from destroyers to battleships and everything in between. The turrets are just too slow to keep up with the turn, which is fine, but it kinda takes away it's ability to get in and get out if you have to spend longer to get those turrets to turn on to target. Mixed with the slow reload means that you'll get maybe 1-2 salvos before getting focused. The armor is a bit weak and can easily be citadelled. The torpedoes are kind of a waste. They have low damage when compared to other ships and torpedoes of that tier and with so few, it's a struggle to kill full health battleships. Assuming that the Tier 10 Venezia using the same guns as the Tier 8 Amalfi, it'll be hard to reliably hit and deal damage to high tier ships. What needs a buff is the shells, or at the very least, the reload needs to be shortened.
  21. Tier V Italian Cruiser Premium Scipione Africano Navigare et audere The Italian Capitani Romani-class light cruisers are, more so than any other type of warship actually built, closest to the line between cruiser and destroyer. Originally intended to be an evolution of the esploratore concept, the class was to be esploratori oceanici, literally ‘ocean scouts’, they were designed to be longer-ranged scouts capable of operating outside of the Mediterranean, and also were designed to counter the threat of the French Le Fantasque and Mogador-class contre-torpilleurs. Due to their category being abolished in the Regia Marina in 1938, all esploratori leggeri being classed as destroyers, and the larger units being classed as light cruisers, they were grouped as light cruisers, in spite of being much smaller and more lightly armed than other light cruisers, and lacking any armor. That being said, they were also too large to be described as destroyers. They ultimately came too late in the war to have much of an impact, but here we’ll have a look at their design history, capabilities, the service career of one of their more famous members, and then see where they fit best in-game. Origins 'Esploratori' had been a long-running concept in the Regia Marina dating back to WWI, involving ships that essentially straddled the line between cruisers and destroyers. Meant to operate as fast and powerful scouts, they were to provide the fleet with reconnaissance of the enemy forces, capable from running from (or chasing down) almost any other ship, and being to easily out-gun any destroyer-sized vessel (which were most likely to be of similar speed). The concept was first inspired by the fast protected cruiser Quarto, laid down in 1909, which was capable of 28 knots. The esploratori began life with the Poerio-class esploratori leggeri (light scouts), laid down in 1913, 1216 tons fully loaded, armed with six single 102mm gun mounts (four to a broadside), two twin 450mm torpedo mounts, and capable of 31.5 knots. Scarcely a year later the 1914 Mirabello-class was laid down, and were far larger – 1972 tons fully loaded, and armed with eight single 102mm mounts (six to a broadside), and identical torpedo armament, and capable of 35 knots. Alessandro Poerio at sea, 1915 In 1917 the Leone-class was ordered, but due to material shortages, they could only be laid down in 1921. Again an increase in displacement came, to 2289 tons fully loaded, and although speed fell to 34 knots, armament was again eight guns, but 120mm and in twin mounts, all centerline, so all could be fired to a broadside. Torpedo mounts became triples. This last class became influential abroad, and provoked a response from the Regia Marina’s new rivals, the French Marine Nationale. They began creating their own counters to the esploratori leggeri, the destroyer-hunting 'contre-torpilleurs', designed to be fast and heavily armed. First came the Jaguar-class of 1922, very large ships weighing in at about 3000 tons, armed with five 130mm guns and making 35.5 knots. 200 tons heavier was the 1927 Guépard-class, which had 138.6mm guns. The Italian response was the Navigatori-class, 2580 ton destroyers designed for 38 knots, with three twin 120mm mounts of a more modern design. While a strong competitor to early French designs, newer contre-torpilluersonly became larger and more powerful, which lead the Italians to commission large scout ships specifically geared towards defeating the French ‘superdestroyers’ – the 6844 ton Giussano-class, capable of 37 knots and armed with eight 152mm guns in power-operated turrets. Eventually re-rated as light cruisers, the Regia Marina was not satisfied with these ships, or the improved Cadorna-class – too much had been sacrificed on such large units for their high speed and armament, and their lack of effective protection was unacceptable for their displacement (on top of numerous other flaws). Still, the French did not leave this unanswered, and responded with their largest destroyers yet – the Le Fantasque (1929) and Mogador (1934) classes, both capable of up to 40 knots, Le Fantasque some 3417 tons with five 138.6mm guns, and Mogador reaching 4026 tons with eight 138.6mm guns. Volta, one of the Mogador-class contre-torpilleurs, at Quiberon Bay, 14 march 1939 Thus, by the late 1930s France had thirty contre-torpilleurs serving with two more soon to complete, while the Regia Marina could answer with only the twelve Navigatori-class esploratori leggeri (the older esploratori were considered too old, and had been rated second-line units) and the six Giussano-class & Cadorna-class large esploratori – eighteen ships total. As French doctrine considered that three superdestroyers should be able to defeat a single cruiser, the forces were roughly equal in number of ships, but the reality of the capability of the light scouts of the Navigatori-class against the 138.6mm ships meant that really the Italians were well outnumbered in this regard. Thus, design work began in 1937 for a class of twelve esplotatori oceanici, long-ranged scouts that would be superior to the newest French ships. The primary contractor was chosen to be Odero-Terni-Orlando, as they already had experience with large fast designs, having designed and built the high-speed destroyer leader Tashkent, 2893 tons standard, 4175 full loaded, theoretically capable of 39 knots on 110,000 shp, but on trials at 3422 tons made 43.53 knots on 130,000 shp. Design Thus, in many respects the design was a larger version of the OTO project, with similar power from its machinery. Standard displacement was to be 3,745 tons, and the ship adopted a flush-deck form with a deckhouse that stretched to encompass the barbettes of ‘B’ and ‘C’ turrets. Hull structure was designed for strength and seaworthiness in spite of high speed, and was constructed mostly out of high-strength ER steel, although nickel-steel alloys were used in other areas. The ship was effectively unarmored, with the only armor plates being 15mm around the bridge structure, and the turrets having 20mm faces and 6mm protection elsewhere. Minor protection against splinters came as a virtue of the hull construction (ER steel, for context, is about 90% the armor strength of American STS plates), but would do nothing against shell impacts (to reach the ‘citadel’ of the ship, only a 9mm plate and then 4mm plate would be needed to be breached). 15 transverse bulkheads divided the hull into 17 sections. Normal displacement was to be 5,035 tons, and full load was 5,420 tons. Machinery was arranged en echelon, the two groups each being made up of two Thornycroft Boilers operating at 320ºC and a pressure of 26 kg/cm2 feeding a Beluzzo geared steam turbine (technically 29 kg, but it was fed to the turbines as 26 kg). These two groups, one ahead of the other drove two shafts for 110,000 shp normal power. The fore group corresponded to the starboard shaft, and the aft group to the portside shaft. Maximum fuel load was 1400 tons, for a range of 4,252 nm at 18 knots. The main battery was composed of eight 135mm/45 cannons, model 1938, arranged in four twin turrets in superfiring pairs fore and aft. They fired 33.0 kg shells at 825 mps to a maximum range of 19.6 km at 45º, their maximum elevation. This low elevation of 45º precluded the ability of the guns to act as dual-purpose weapons. Turrets were power-operated and fitted with the most advanced stabilization and RPC systems available to the Regia Marina at the time, with each gun capable of firing a round every 8 seconds. Rammers were recoil powered, but as these were too weak to operate at higher elevations, rounds were manually loaded at elevations over +30º. Electric lifts gave a maximum replenishment rate of 18 rounds per gun per minute, but if forced to operate under manual conditions this fell to about 9 rounds per minute per gun. Ammunition load was 160 rounds per gun, each turret magazine holding 110 rounds of SAP, 189 rounds of HE, and 21 anti-aircraft shells, all of which had 8.88 kg flashless charges. 65 illumination rounds were also carried in each magazine, although only half of these had flashless charges. The High-Explosive ammunition had 5.45% filler (1.8 kg) and was fitted with an instant nose-fuse, while the Semi Armor-Piercing had 4.44% filler (1.465 kg) with a instant base-fuse, and according to 1942 fleet instructions could penetrate over 53mm of armor at 11 km, 49mm at 13 km, and 38mm at 16 km. The fire control system used aboard the Capitani were evolutions of the mainstay cruiser fire control system of the 1930s, although the scale was reduced as a result of the ship size. The primary director, fitted atop the conning tower, was fitted with the new 4-meter rangefinders, while the backup director was fitted atop the aft superstructure, abaft the second funnel, holding only a single 4-meter rangefinder. Curiously, while it had an APG unit (an inclinometer), it was separate to the director structure. Due to the small size of the turrets, unlike most Italian cruisers the turrets did not hold rangefinders of their own. For night combat, two special night directors flanked the bridge, and two remote or manually controlled searchlights were fitted on either side of the second funnel. This information would be fed to a RM Type-1 version 3 (RM-13) fire control computer. This computer was directly derived from the RM-13 computer, which equipped most of the Italian cruisers of the 1930s (all but the Giussano-class). The main difference was the implementation of the Type 4 Gimetro in the RM-13, necessary for the more advanced stabilization systems, while the RM-12 used the older Type 2. Compared to the Type 2, the Type 4 measured the rotational velocity of line of sight automatically rather than manually (introduced on the Type 3, carried over to the Type 4), and used a dedicated gyrostat to measure the heel/list of the ship. The Type 4 itself was stabilized, greatly increasing the accuracy of the system. It was capable of engaging at own ship speeds of up to 40 knots, and target enemy ships making up to 40 knots, with a maximum range rate of 77.75 knots. Wind speed could be up to 40 meters/second, and heel/list could be as great as 15º. Up to two enemy ships could be targeted at a time, with the fore guns falling under control of the primary directors, and the aft guns being controlled by the reserve director. Although AA shells were carried, the fire control system did not provide control for anti-aircraft work. Although it had originally been planned for the midrange AA armament to be made up of the new Ansaldo 65mm/64 automatic anti-aircraft cannon, this was not to be. It fired 4.08 kg shells at a velocity of 950 mps to a maximum effective range of 7500 meters at 45º, and had a ceiling of 5000 meters. Originally it had been planned to utilize electric loading to generate a rate of fire of 50-60 rounds per minute, but as the rammer was plagued with trouble it was reverted to a hand-loading system capable of 20 rpm, which made the system far less valuable, and due to the slow procurement of the system eventually the RM gave up on it in favor a tried and true design. Instead, the Breda 37mm/54 in RM 1939 single mounts was chosen, which had given good service already in the war on destroyers, and was very well liked by AA crews. Firing a 823-gram shell to a maximum effective range of 4000 meters, the Breda 37mm gun was capable of a practical rate of fire of 140 rounds per minute, and eight guns were mounted total (four to a broadside), six abreast the forward superstructure, and two abreast the aft tower. Ammunition lockers were beneath the mounts, and were brought up via electric lifts (with manual reserve drives). Total capacity for the ship was 12,000 rounds. In addition, for close-range AA work four Breda 20mm/65 M1935 twin mounts were placed on the structure around the second funnel. They fired a 123-gram shell to an effective range of 1200 meters, with a practical rate of fire of 150 rounds per minute. Ammunition replenishment was as for the 37mm cannons, with 19,200 rounds stored. For use against heavier targets, a battery of eight torpedo tubes was carried, in two quadruple ‘four-leaf-clover’ mounts that stacked the tubes in a 2x2 layout rather than the conventional side-by-side system. They were placed on centerline mounts above the turbine rooms, within the deckhouse, in a similar layout to that used by the Japanese Yubari and Agano-class light cruisers. They fired Si 270 ‘M’ 533mm torpedoes, the standard Italian surface-ship torpedo, which had a 270 kg TNT warhead, and settings for 4000, 8000, and 12000 meters (for speeds of 48, 38, and 30 knots respectively). Four torpedoes could be carried in reserve, for the forward mount. These ships were far from one-trick ponies, however, and also carried equipment for underwater warfare. Provisions for launching 100-kg depth charges were fitted, with two throwers fitted. Likewise, the ships could carry mines, number varying depending on type; 136 ‘Elia’ 145 kg TNT anti-submarine contact mines 120 ‘Bollo’ 125 kg TNT contact mines 114 'P200' 200 kg TNT dual-purpose mines (contact only early-war, later also acoustic. Anti-sub & anti-ship) As carrying such a massive number of mines at a given time would greatly reduce combat ability (impossible to use torpedo tubes or No.4 135mm mount), usually combat loads would only consist of 52, 48, and 40 mines respectively. For concealment, the ships carried smoke generators, both for additives to the main funnels, but also a stern-mounted hydrogen-chloride smokescreen generator. The ships were also some of the only Italian ships to enter service with radar, fitting the EC-3/ter ‘Gufo’ search radar. Operating on 400 MHz, it had a power output of 10 kW on a 75cm wavelength. It was mounted about 23.6 meters above the waterline, and could detect aircraft out to a range of 80 km, and medium-sized surface ships out to a range of a little less than 24 km. Although it was meant only as a search radar, it could also be manually fixed on a given azimuth to refine range and bearing information. In spite of this, it was not accurate enough in bearing to facilitate radar blind fire (radar controlled gunnery without the aid optical instruments). Such an ability would not be availed until the Gufo G.III fire control radar, but this arrived too late in the war to be fitted to any Italian warships. History Construction and service until the Armistice of Cassibile Ordered as part of the 1938 naval program, the tenth member of the class would be laid down as the Scipione Africano on 28 September 1939 at the yards of OTO Livorno. Like all her sisters, her name was taken from an ancient Roman leader, making the class unique in the history of the Regia Marina and Marina Militare. Scipione Africano was named for the famous Roman Consul who lead major armies of the Roman Republic in the Second Punic War, defeating the Carthaginians in Iberia and then later defeating the famous Hannibal Barca in the Battle of Zama, on Carthage’s very shores. Due to material shortages resulting from sanctions placed on Italy by France and Great Britain, her construction time was exacerbated, but she skipped the first ‘culling’ of the Capitani, where four were cancelled shortly after Italy’s entry into the war due to the need for raw materials, and subsequently scrapped. Construction of the hull continued slowly, but on 12 January 1941, 15 & ½ months after being laid down, Scipione Africano was launched. Work on her continued, but overall pace was slow due to lack of raw material, and it was not until 23 April 1943 that she would be completed, and shortly after commissioned into the Regia Marina with the motto Navigare et audere, or ‘Dare to sail’. She was only the second sister of her class to be commissioned, and her small increase to the strength of the Regia Marina could do little to offset the loss of the heavy cruiser Trieste and heavy damage to Gorizia suffered two weeks earlier. Upon entering service she was assigned to the Fleet Destroyer Group with her sister Attilio Regolo. Scipione Africano in construction, some time in 1941-1942 Scipione Africano’s life was not expected to be long, and nor was the remainder of most of the fleet. The fact the end of the war was approaching for Italy was all too clear, and the Regia Marina had already decided the end of the war would not be faced with white flags or scuttling charges. That being said, the navy had no intention of throwing lives away for no benefit, and due to the fact no effective air cover could be provided that far south, action in the Central Mediterranean was ruled out. If Sicily was invaded, it would have to be on it’s own. Sardinia and Corsica, however, were on the table to defend. As a result, in May of 1943 the Regia Marina’s Naval Battle Force (FBN) embarked on its largest exercise since being formed (and one of the largest conducted by the RM in the entire war). In these exercises, Scipione Africano had the unfortunate distinguishing role of being responsible for all the failure-to-fires of 135mm guns in the fleet, 46 of the 675 rounds fired by her and Atillio Regolo failing to fire properly. 12 of these were due to equipment failures, and 34 due to personnel. Ironically, this gave the 135mm guns the highest failure rate out (7%) of any weapon in the fleet, and given much of that was due to the newness of the ship to the crew, it spoke well of the reliability of the fleet’s weaponry. The next highest rate came from the 37mm cannons at 4.8%, 80% of which was due to equipment failures. Scipione Africano at sea, in mid-1943 June was spent in a state of much frustration, as the FBN was left largely in port, where risk was not much less than in battle due to the presence of powerful USAAC heavy bomber raids, which had temporarily put the battleships Vittorio Veneto and Roma out of action. Vittorio Veneto was repaired and put to readiness in early July, and not a moment to soon. On the night July 10th, the Allies launched Operation Husky: the invasion of Sicily. Although the fleet fired up its boilers, due to missing two of the battleships (Vittorio Veneto was not yet fully ready for action) and the insufficient air cover that could supplied, it was decided not to employ the FBN. In the meantime, however, it was decided to reactive and boost the force in the Ionian Sea, using crew from the heavy cruisers Trieste and Gorizia to reactivate the battleships Caio Duilio and Andrea Doria. It was decided to send the Scipione Africano to reinforce this force, before the Straits of Messina were cut off permanently. Scipione Africano departed La Spezia under the command of Captain Ernesto de Pellegrini dai Coi on the 15th for Operazione Scilla (Operation Scylla), but was forced to briefly stop in Naples after being sighted by a British seaplane. In her stopover in Naples she embarked an air liason and Metox equipment (a German radar warning system, activated by enemy radar). She continued her mission on the 16th, leaving at 1815 and in the early hours of the 17th of July approached the straits. By this time, most of the southern half of Sicily had fallen into Allied hands, and with it the port of Augusta. As a measure to prevent the Axis from evacuating Sicily, the Allies had begun basing MTB squadrons there in order to attack whatever came through. Therefore, on the night of the 16th, the British 10th MTB Flotilla was stationed in the straights, made up of four Elco-type MTBs (MTB 260, 313, 315, & 316). Running at 24 knots, at 0200 Scipione picked up the four MTB’s on her radar at a range of 10,000 meters. Initially mistaken as friendly barges, it was not until 0213 that the movement of the MTBs, previously stopped, convinced Captain Pellegrini that they were hostile, and he immediately ordered combat stations, the cruiser accelerating up to 30 knots. As the cruiser accelerated into action, the British likewise sprung into action, the flotilla attempting position themselves to attack from either side. The Lieutenant in command (Lieutenant Dennis Jermain), aboard MTB 315, was entirely surprised but the sudden appearance of the small cruiser, but his reactions were quick and allowed his boat and MTB 316 to maneuver in order to attack from the east (Scipione Africano’s portside), with the other two engaging from the west. In spite of this, the incoming warship continued to be a surprise, the high speed of the Scipione bringing her into action sooner than anyone expected as she hurtled towards 37 knots. The British MTB’s uncorked their torpedoes at close range, and at great cost. 260 and 313 fired off three torpedoes at 300 yards, but before they even hit the water the cruiser opened fire on the Captain’s order. The speed and violence at which she brought her weaponry into action surprised all involved, even Pelligrini, as her main guns and autocannons blazed. MTB 313 took damage and suffered a causality and KIA, forced to limp away, while MTB 260 was set aflame and retreated, neither boat firing anymore torpedoes. As the cruiser threaded the torpedoes, she engaged MTB 316 at a range of just 50 yards, detonating the boat with a single salvo before she could launch. The explosion was so violent, debris from the MTB fell aboard the Italian cruiser. MTB 315 avoided any damage and launched two torpedoes, but failed to score any hits. She attempted to pursu4e further but was driven off by fire from the autocannons. The Scipione Africano, still accelerating, continued at high speed, working up to 40 knots according to some sources, and 43 knots according to others (including Pelligrini's report of the action). The fight with the Elco’s had left the cruiser unscathed, but her luck was not to hold, as moments after she came under fire from Axis coastal batteries on either side of the Straits, and she suffered two wounded. Flashing recognition signals, she made good her escape with her high speed, and finally made port at Taranto at 0940 later that morning, and was assigned to the Taranto light cruiser group alongside her other sister, Pompeo Magno, and the old light cruiser Luigi Cadorna. Making use of her minelaying capabilities, she and Cadorna laid four defensive fields in the Gulf of Taranto and Gulf of Squillace between the 4th and 17th of August, and used her high speed to conduct missions to discourage allied attempts to stop the evacuation from Sicily of German and Italian forces, as the island’s defense continued to collapse. However, it was clear that time was running out, and the situation of the Taranto squadron was beyond hopeless. Although the battleships Caio Duilio and Andrea Doria had been reactivated, they were only 23887-ton warships armed with 320mm guns and capable of 26 knots. With them were three small light cruisers, the aged Cadorna, and the two Capitani. The only escorts available were three destroyers and three torpedo boats. If they sortied, they would have to face the British battleships King George V and Howe, both 36727-ton battleships armed with 356mm guns and capable of 27 knots, and fitted with much heavier armor… plus their escorts. Still, as the clock ticked down to the 8th of September, it became clear that one way or another their fates would be resolved – likely, it seemed, as a distraction for the intervention of the main battle fleet against the Allied landings at Anzio. By this point, she had barely been four months in service, and had steamed only 2,759 nm in operations, with a single surface action to her name. Eleven of her fifteen missions had been exercises, the others being made up of the recent mine-laying operation and three transfer missions (one of these being Operation Scylla). Scipione Africano in Taranto, 27 October 1943 The Armistice In the early evening of the 8th, however, the situation changed entirely when the Armistice of Cassibile was announced. Italy had surrendered to the Allied Powers, but her war was far from over, and so was Scipione Africano’s. The Germans had pre-empted the Italian move and moved additional troops into the country. When the armistice was announced, they went to war with their former allies, immediately moving to seize Italian military units. Chaos broke out, as various groups of the armed forces were dis-armed, resisted, or decided to join the Germans. While various parts of the Italian army and air force disintegrated, the Regia Marina knew where its loyalties lay, and almost unanimously sided with the Kingdom of Italy. Conflict between parts of the Regia Marina and various German units would erupt in various ports as the two sides engaged in open combat. That very night, the two German S-boats S-54 and S-61 had wisely fled Taranto, but not before they laid mines. At 0600 on the morning of the 9th, Scipione Africano was ordered to head north, into the Adriatic. Her mission was perhaps the most important of any Italian warship in that tumultuous period – she was to head to Pescara, in Abruzzo, in order to rescue the heads of Government, as it became clear that Rome could not be held against the Germans. At roughly 1400 Scipione Africano was making 28 knots just off the Cape of Otranto, when she encountered the same two S-boats and MPF F478. The S-boats had in fact just sunk the auxiliary minesweeper Vulcania (R240) a mile and a half outside the small port of Santa Maria di Leuca, and had been chased away by Italian shore batteries. Although Pellegrini had no knowledge of the loss of the 91-ton minesweeper and the subsequent action, the S-boats panicked, and scuttled the slow MPF after taking its crew aboard. As the F478 blew apart, they fled with the aid of a smokescreen. Although the theatrics put on by the Germans certainly caught his attention, Pellegrini decided not to pursue, as the German ships had not attempted to attack his ship, and he had a more important mission to attend to. Thus, Scipione Africano continued north. Not long after, she received the signal from Admiral Brivonesi (the ranking officer at Taranto) warning of the hostile action of the two S-boats, which he had himself only learned of at 1300. This would prove to have significant repercussions, as the two S-boats worked their way up the Adriatic ambushing numerous small vessels over the coming days. Scipione reached Pescara shortly after midnight, but the corvette she was meant to protect, Baionetta, had already departed with her precious cargo – much of the surviving Italian high command. She had continued to Ortona, further south, and picked up King Vittorio Emmanuelle III and his family at about 0110, and then left port, Scipione Africano catching up to her at 0700. From there she escorted the corvette to the safe port of Brindisi, arriving at 1600. The journey had thankfully been fairly uneventful save for German air attack, which was driven off by Scipione’s anti-aircraft fire. Scipione had managed to navigate the armistice period successfully, but this was no so for all of her sisters, many of whom witnessed some of the darker examples of the dramas that played out across the Mediterranean. Attilo Regolo, who stayed with the main battlefleet, was present when the battleship Roma was lost due to air attack and suffering two blows from PC 1400X guided bombs, and helped rescue survivors before sailing to the Balerics to deposit the wounded, refusing to be interned or surrender any control over the ship. Pompeo Magno sailed with Admiral Da Zara’s force (battleships Caio Duilio, Andrea Doria, light cruiser Luigi Cadorna, and destroyer Nicosolo da Recco). The Rear Admiral originally in charge of her and the other light cruisers, Giovanni Galati, had been placed under arrest by the aforementioned Admiral Brivonesi – having no intention to sail to Malta, he instead declared that he would take his cruisers north, and seek an end to his force in battle with Allied forces. The implications of such an action would have been disastrous, and Brivonesi’s hand was forced when Galati refused to back down. Ultimately, the ships of the Taranto force were the first Italian force to arrive at Malta at 1700, and began to wage the war of nerves against the British forces. The British demanded the ships be dis-armed save for AA guns, seal the radio room, place all crew weapons in the stern, and remove any scuttling charges. Da Zara’s force refused. The following days would see a tense situation develop, the British intending the Italians ultimately surrender their ships, and the Italians having no intention to do so. Perhaps no one described the situation better than the British Admiral Cunningham, when he signaled the Admiralty “Be pleased to inform their Lordships that the Italian Battle fleet now lays at anchor under the guns of the fortress of Malta.” - the Italian battlefleet (Da Zara’s force being joined by the main battlefleet) was at anchor in Malta, but that was all, and the Allied Powers exercised no power over the Italian fleet. Giulio Germanico had perhaps the most dramatic and tragic tale. At 94% complete, she was not yet fully operational, but her crew was already aboard her when the Germans arrived at Castellammare di Stabia (the town who’s shipyards she was built at). Her commander, Lieutenant Commander Domenico Biffago, had no intention of surrendering his ships, and organized local crews and carabineri to defend the shipyards and the town, with the Giulio Germanico providing support with her armament. The plan was to hold out until Allied troops relieved them. However, what the crews could no and did not know was that no reinforcements were coming to help them. For three days they repulsed assault after assault by German forces, until the cruiser finally ran out of ammunition. Baffigo was invited by the Germans to negotiate, and Baffigo accepted. Unfortunately, like many Italian officers who had resisted the German invasion, he and those accompanying him (two lieutenants and a seaman) discovered what negotiation with the Germans actually meant. The Germans took him prisoner, and brought him to Naples, where he and those with him were promptly executed. Giulio Germanico was ultimately scuttled by the Germans as they fled Naples after being ejected by the local population. She would later be raised by the Marina Militare (the Italian Navy post-war), was rebuilt, and commissioned as the San Marco, serving into the 1970s. On the 29th of September, Scipione Africano left Brindisi with Marshal Badoglio on board, bound for Malta. They made port on the same day, where the terms of the ‘long armistice’ were signed on board the battleship Nelson. Although more formal than anything else, it confirmed the unconditional surrender, on an official if not practical level, of the Kingdom of Italy, and made official its entry into the war on the side of the Allies as a co-belligerent, but not Allied, power. Co-Belligerency and Post-War Italy retained control of its armed forces, although precious little remained of coherent formations of the army and air force. The navy was a different story, and although the two Littorio-class battleships were interned in the Great Bitter Lakes, most of the rest of the Italian fleet remained operational and purely under Italian control, and went on to serve with the Allies in a variety of capacities. Many of the cruisers would serve on anti-commerce patrols against German raiders in the Atlantic, while destroyers and torpedo boats would serve escorting allied convoys in the Mediterranean, freeing up Allied ships for other duties. Some were also involved in island campaigns in company with the British, in the struggle for the Aegean Sea. Italian torpedo boats and submarines, due to their familiarity with Axis tactics and their experience fighting Allied vessels, were used to help train Allied submarine and anti-submarine forces, as they were able to offer much more realistic opponents than what had been available before. Up until the Armistice, Scipione Africano had seen only brief service, carrying out 15 missions for a total of 2,759 nm steamed and 195 hours in operation over the course of four months. However, she was given new life in the Co-Belligerent Regia Marina. On 6 October she was made the command ship of the Light Cruiser & Destroyer Squadron, although in truth she was the only cruiser to be part of it, the rest serving elsewhere. She served in this capacity until 1 February 1944, when she was moved to 7ª Divisione. During the co-belligerency period she was very active, carrying out 146 missions (acting as a transport for 102 of them), and steaming 56,637 nm over 2,443 hours until the end of the war in Europe. Scipione Africano and four torpedo-boats at La Spezia, some time in 1946 At the end of the war she was moved to La Spezia in preparation for the clauses of the post-war treaties, as she was to be given as repatriations for war damages. She was decommissioned from the Marina Militare (the new name of the Italian Navy, since the monarchy had been abolished in 1946) on 8 August 1948, and sold to France as the ‘S.7’ on 15 August, in the port of Toulon. Scipione Africano in Taranto, 27 February 1947 Service in the Marine Nationale On 23 July 1948, the French re-commissioned S.7 as the Guichen, and placed into the 2nd Light Cruiser Division on 7 Septmeber. In 1949 she helped transport French gold reserves, evacuated in 1940, back to France, taking the gold from Oran to Toulon. In 1950, Guichen was involved in sonar tests. In March 1951, she was re-designated a 'destroyer-escorteur de 1re classe' (1st class destroyer escort), but this was short lived as on 14 July 1951 she started a major reconstruction process that would totally alter the face and utility of the ship. The entirety of the armament was removed and the upper works rebuilt, with a heavy focus on anti-aircraft firepower. Her main armament was composed of six German 10.5cm/65 SK C/33 in C/37 twin mounts, one mount place on the bow and two placed aft in a super-firing arrangement. Dual-Purpose weapons in mounts identical to those that armed the Bismarck-class battleships, they fired 15.1 kg shells at a velocity of 900 meters per second. Their effective anti-aircraft range was 9500 meters, and 12000 meters against ships. They fired at a rate of 10 to 15 rounds per minute. They were controlled by a director fitted with a DRBC 11 fire control radar. She was also armed with ten Bofors 57mm/60 autocannons, in five twin mounts (one above and behind the fore 10.5cm mount, and four just aft of the aft funnel). Powerful anti-aircraft guns fitted to many French warships (including the battleship Jean Bart), they could fire 120 projectiles weighing 2.6 kg at a velocity of 865 mps each minute. Two directors were fitted, each with a DRBC 30 fire control radar. Guichen also found herself fitted with a considerable torpedo battery, four triple 550mm Mle KT 50 mounts mounted forward on the ship, which were fitted with anti-submarine torpedoes. The overall length of the ship decreased by 1.1 meters, while her tonnage at full load increased by 80 tons. With a crew of 353, she required only 84.4% of the manpower she did before. Although machinery did not change, operational range fell from 4,252 nm at 18 knots to 3600 nm at 18 knots, so it seems likely that fuel load dropped from the original 1400 tons (that, or a difference in fuel quality available?). Work was completed on 26 August 1953, re-commissioning took place in 1954, and she returned to service on 9 April 1955, and re-rated an 'Escorteur d'Escadre; (Fleet Escort) with the NATO designation D607. Guichen was assigned to the 2nd Division, which based out of Bizerte in Algeria. Overall, the modernization of the two Capitani (Guichen and Châteaurenault, the ex-Attilio Regolo) was rather un-successful, despite the best intentions. The positioning by the French of so much armament relatively high up in the ship severely impacted the stability vessel, and rendered the armament unusable in poor weather. Although the top speed in theory dropped to 39 knots, in practical terms it was found the maximum speed had dropped to 34 knots, adequate for their new task (the new T47-class destroyers were of the same top speed), but also illustrative as to how damaging the reconstruction was to the stability and handling characteristics of the ship. In 1957, she underwent another major refit, to make her a command ship for l'Escadre Lègere, ‘The Light Fleet’. The work removed an aft 10.5cm mount and a pair of her torpedo banks, adding radar and command faculties. The refit finished in 1958, and on 14 October Guichen became the flagship of The Atlantic Light Fleet, based in Brest. She as involved in most French operations until she and the brand-new submarine Marsouin accidentally collided off Lisbon on 20 June 1959 and had to be repaired – but the repairs were brief and she was back in service in time for a naval parade on 16 July. However, Guichen was replaced by her sister Châteaurenault on 16 April 1961, and was put into reserve. She was disarmed in June 1963, and used as a floating platform for the Lanvéoc Poulmic naval school. She was struck from the French naval register on 1 June 1976, and given the serial number Q554, and was finally sold for demolition in January 1982. This made her one of the last of her sisters, as only the San Giorgio (ex-Pompeo Magno) outlived her, being scrapped in 1987, the last cruiser of the old Regia Marina. Scipione Africano In-Game Well, as you’ve read above, Scipione Africano and her sisters were built to kill the French super destroyers, specifically those like Le Terrible (placed at tier VIII in-game). And that’s probably why you’re wondering why the title of this thread says tier V cruiser, rather than tier VIII, IX, or X. My logic is simple, in this case. Unlike the French ships, which are built as destroyers, the Scipione is not, and she’s a much taller ship than even Mogador. Thus, you’re sailing around with a ship that will likely have similar detection to something like Khabarovsk, with the same speed, but lacks the same armor protection, because it is not blessed by Stalin’s design bureau, where the laws of physics are a secondary concern. I think you can imagine why that would be painful. Now, I’m fairly sure that as a tech tree ship, Attilio Regolo (as the class leader) will probably be at that high of a tier, with similar a-historical performance buffs as something like Le Terrible. After all, improved versions of the 135mm gun were developed post war, with rates of fire of up to 20 rpm (or 25 rpm for the 135/53). But for a ship that sticks with purely historical statistics, the fact of the matter is that Scipione Africano is simply not suited to higher tiers, where many of her advantages are either not present, or are disadvantages. Thus, tier V is something she is far better suited to, as a cruiser, due to the very comparable French light cruiser Émile Bertin. Bertin is likewise lacking in armor, and as such only uses the standard extremity armor plating for her hull armor – the same goes for Scipione, making them effectively equal in that regard. With that set as a starting point, let me outline the stats Scipione Africano would have, that way we can compare them tit-for-tat. The obvious case here is that Scipione Africano is a much smaller ship, both in dimensions (177.0 meters length versus 142.9 meters), and tonnage, and as a result the Scipione has significantly less hitpoints – 26,500 versus 20,000 – 75% of what the French cruiser has. The smaller cruiser is 4 knots faster, with a tighter turn radius and faster rudder shift, and 2400 meters less detection range by sea. Armor is essentially equal, so while Émile Bertin can afford to take more hits, she’s also much easier to hit overall, greatly balancing out their disparity in survivability. The same story is true of their main battery. As expected of 152mm guns, the French cruiser has greater reach (by 2850 meters), and individually her shells hit much harder – 3300 versus 2500 damage for the AP (100mm greater penetration at 0 km), and HE rated at 2200/12% versus 2000/7%, with 2mm greater penetration. Émile Bertin even has more guns to a broadside, 9 versus 8. However, this tends to be balanced out by the fact the Scipione’s guns fire 63% faster than Bertin’s, for 60 versus 41 shells per minute, and a higher dpm overall despite the lesser hitting power. Anti-aircraft firepower is effectively equal between the two ships, while Scipione has slower-loading, but more powerful torpedoes than Bertin – but on much more limited firing arcs (think Yubari) in spite of the ability to fire eight to a broadside compared to three. Scipione Africano provides a unique style of gameplay for tier V cruisers, due to its small size but greater modernity than same-tier competition. The biggest differences are the emphasis on the Fisher-esque Speed is armor mantra Scipione must follow, as dodging shells at over 40 knots will be her greatest asset in avoiding damage – her citadel protection consists of little more than two 13mm plates, so while proof against HE citadels like Émile Bertin, she is still plenty vulnerable to APC shells, if they can fuse within her citadel, and 203mm shells will overmatch this plating. Most other same-tier cruisers, as the below chart demonstrates, carry relatively significant armor, but operate at much lower speeds, and rely on different methods of damage mitigation. Likewise, your damage output is going to rely much more heavily on raw dpm, given most of these ships are matching 152mm guns (180-203mm for some) to your 135mm guns. You lesser individual hitting power means you need to place more rounds on target, but your destroyer dispersion and rate of fire should help with that. So, what role does Scipione occupy in battle? Well, for one, you speed should help you determine that. Much as she was the fastest surface combatant of WWII, at tier V you’re the fastest ship around. Most cruisers go around 32-35 knots, with the exception of 39-knot Émile Bertin, and destroyers are 35-37 knots for the most part, save for 39-knot Minekaze and 42-knot Podvoisky. Thus, you can chase down, or escape from, anything you’ll meet. At 10.2 km surface detection (effectively 9.89 km with complimentary camouflage, and 8.9 km with CE), you won’t sneak up on any destroyers, but at the same time it can get you close enough for your speed to not make it matter – especially if they decide to fire back. You’re also considerably more stealthy than any cruiser, save for Emerald, which means you can easily pick and chose your fights against any cruisers, having both the speed and stealth to disengage at a whim. Against enemy destroyers, your superior speed will make it difficult for them to disengage, and due to the hitting power of your shells, your individual hits will deal heavy damage – only 17-20 hits are needed to put down any destroyer at this tier, or the equivalent of 3 broadsides – so it should only take 16-24 seconds to put down any tier V destroyer. Enemy cruisers will be a different story, with significantly more health, and armor. That being said, you have a significantly higher speed than them, and due to your handling can so an even better job at long-range dodging than the larger Émile Bertin. It is doubtful, at long range, that your AP will be effective against them – with lighter shells than those of Le Terrible’s 138.6mm guns (33 versus 39.9 kg), even though yours are fired at marginally higher velocity, penetration will still be lesser than the 138.6/50 at most ranges – so you shouldn’t try for AP unless the enemy cruiser is within 10 km and not angled well (unless, perhaps, it’s an Émile Bertin). If in a close-quarters fight, however, you should have more than enough penetration to deal with their armor, and ignoring even that, you’ve got eight torpedoes to fire to a broadside – so one way or another, whatever sails next to you is going to be very dead, very fast. Battleships will be difficult targets in many respects. AP obviously won’t be very effective, and although you have impressive volume for tier V, individually the HE shells aren’t anything special next to other cruiser HE shells. You’re going to have to rely on long-range HE spam to take care of them, but ideally you really shouldn’t be tying yourself down on slow battleships when your high speed could be a greater asset elsewhere. Other teammates are likely better suited to countering battleships, and given that, you should relieve pressure elsewhere. That being said, if you must deal with battleships, remember that like Émile Bertin, you have no armor for your citadel – so the same rules apply. Bertin captains should be well aware that they’re better off going broadside to battleships to facilitate overpens, and that angling will result in full penetrations or citadels. For Scipione, this is likewise true – although as your beam is only 14.4 meters versus the 16 meters of the French cruiser, you’re actually ‘better’ at getting over-penetrated by shells than Bertin. Also remember that, if forced to face a battleship up-close… you do have that eight-torpedo broadside. I wouldn’t advise looking for a close encounter of the brown-pants kind, but you’ve got a maximum damage output of 109,336 from your torpedoes. You’re more than capable of wiping out any battleship you’ll encounter in a single pass, and at such a close range, shots against your broadside are guaranteed to overpenetrate. Carriers… well, let’s be frank. Most cruisers don’t have very effective AA at tier V, and while Scipione has pretty great output from her medium AA guns – she lacks any AA beyond 3.5 km due to the lack of heavy guns. More likely than not, what will save you from bombs and torpedoes won’t be the Breda autocannons blazing away, but your own speed and handling. Conclusions Scipione Africano hopefully should be one of the more fun Italian ships to exist as a premium, without just being as blatantly OP as something like Giulio Cesare. She’s a small, fragile, but insanely fast cruiser with a surprisingly potent bite – and to be frank, that’s all you really need to know. She’s the fastest cruiser in the game, and the only destroyer faster than her is the tier VIII Le Terrible, with the aid of the unique French speed boost. From a gameplay perspective, she’s a fairly solid, and certainly unique ship. From a historical perspective, she’s also quite an attractive ship. She had a longer service life than anyone expected when she was completed, and played an important role during the turbulent period of the Armistice. She also secured her place in history as, with her sisters, being the fastest surface combatants of WWII - as although destroyers and some cruisers would claim higher figures in trials, none of them would achieve the same speeds in service. Scipione Africano did, and perhaps more importantly than anything else, she could also engage in effective gunnery while doing so, something none of the other ‘fast’ ships (such as the Le Fantasque and Mogador classes) could claim. During Operation Scylla she laid claim to the highest-speed gunnery ever fought at sea, and she was the only Italian ship during WWII to use radar at night to help destroy enemy targets. Regardless of how you cut it, she’s earned her premium spot, and she offers unique gameplay for the position, too.
  22. OK WG So far we have 4 in game Italian warships with number 5 being tested but as of yet no tech tree lines, we have heard all the stories about when they will arrive, next year or 2021 or 2041 Blah blah blah. Sometime in the not to distant Yoshino will be released and some folks will be elated good for them but for many here this is no fun we want to see the Italian Tricolour fluttering high on masts on the High Seas. Now of course I'm certain that WG has set out on there spread sheet a release day list of ships. Since it will be quite some time till we see a tech tree line flying the Tricolour. I am " THROWING DOWN THE GAUNTLET " LESTA I CHALLENGE you to rip up your pre planned release schedule and " Throw caution to the Wind ", "Think outside the Box", " Live Dangerously ", " Be Unpredictable ", " Take a leap of Faith ", "Break the Mould " and "Give yourself to the DARK SIDE " and create, design and release a Tier 9 or 10 FREE XP Italian ship next after Yoshino, I DARE YOU WG. I call upon the following Moderators to pass on my challenge to WG HQ, @Radar_X, @turbo07, @Femennenly. regards
  23. Recently I watched Flamu’s and sea raptor’s quick review of Leone. After seeing the concealment, reload of guns, the double torp mounts with only 4 torps, and the low speed, I’m thinking that some of the stats will change once this ship goes into testing. May tier 6 better it seems like it cannot compete. Not to mention that if one decides to treat this ship as a gun boat, they will only be able to use HE as an option because the AP appears to be horrid. Plus the low speed and short smoke duratiOn, I’m thinking that I will be hard to put gun and evade other dd’s. Especially if up tiered. Even though there seem to be a lot of bad areas, I’m hoping that once it undergoes testing it will receive some buffs in some of the areas. What are your thoughts at first glance? ( , flamu’s review starts at 10:26)
  24. Durante un largo tiempo me he dedicado a recolectar información sobre ciertos buques construidos durante, entre, y después de las guerras mundiales y que podrían destacar como candidatos al juego que actualmente nos presenta WG. Traté de meterme en la cabeza de los desarrolladores deduciendo las ecuaciones a partir de las cuales se determina los puntos de vida de cada buque basándose en el deslazamiento de este, aunque como se darán cuenta algunos no concuerdan con los presentados en el juego. Algunas ramas también presentan problemas relacionados con la ubicación de sus buques en el tier adecuado, como es el caso de los destructores franceses e italianos, otros como los cruceros japoneses presentan problemas por la información poco clara respecto a sus desplazamientos en tonelaje, y para el caso de algunos portaaviones, sus valores de HP están calculados basándose en su desplazamiento estándar y no su desplazamiento a plena carga, como en el caso de Kaga. Algunos buques no están situados en el mismo tier en el archivo que en el juego, eso se debe a una diferencia de opiniones personal contra WG. También hay buques que no están dentro de las ramas pero se indican en las tablas o debajo de las ramas mismas, esto se debe a que su ubicación es difícil de decidir. Las ramas están ordenadas por colores y estas incluyen; portaaviones, conversiones a portaaviones, acorazados, cruceros de batalla, grandes cruceros, cruceros, cruceros antiaéreos y destructores. Los asteriscos representan navíos que fueron inventados por el equipo de desarrollo de WG. Las fechas indicadas entre paréntesis indican que el buque es un diseño que nunca se construyó o terminó su construcción y el año indica su fecha de diseño. No se incluyen barcos que pertenezcan a clases ya mencionadas en naciones mas grandes, un ejemplo claro sería el crucero argentino General Belgrano que ya está representado por la clase Brooklyn. Los cuadros de distinto color dentro de las tablas de HP representan tonelajes modificados por WG o por mí haciendo referencia a un incremento del tonelaje original debido a una modernización ficticia del buque. Los nombres de los buques dentro de las tablas de HP que están centrados no obedecen la ecuación principal para la clase, como es el caso de los grandes cruceros que no siguen la ecuación general de los cruceros y por eso tienen una ecuación propia. Lo mismo ocurre con algunas de las naves convertidas a portaaviones, que por su excesivo desplazamiento, tienen una ecuación diferente a la del resto de los portaaviones. Espero sus comentarios y sus críticas. Compartan si lo consideran oportuno o interesante. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1wckrRPErjwJ46erYOaJ1Cx3ycs8AClPx
×