Search the Community

We're back once again, this time with Italian subs! No, Homer I mean literally; submarines. Huh, as a former Naval Reservist, I figured he'd want to stick around for this? Oh well. So, yes, the Italians. Yet another nation who saw fit to split their submarine types between large ocean-going (i.e. "cruiser" subs), and smaller coastal/ sea going types. Now in fairness to them, this does make a lot of sense as Italy knew most of time any fleet actions that they took part in would be limited to the Med. And being a long peninsular nation sticking right out in the middle of it, having a large number of smaller coastal type SS's is quite sensible. In fact, Italy sort of followed the trends of other prominent European navies of the day (but mainly the French) in creating this force. Right down to the 600 tonne series boats and even an attempt at a Surcouf-esque cruiser! Now while this does mean that Italy in theory could craft 2 separate lines much like we saw with Japan or LATAM, there is one crippling flaw; Italy surrendered in 1943. This meant that they not only didn't get very far in any advanced submarine programs they might have had, they weren't even allowed to manufacture or operate submarines until 1952, despite being a founding member of NATO (more on that later). In other words, queue the G/B/T boats once again for high tier fun! Ok, ok enough hyperbole. What does this actually mean in terms of Italy's SS branch? Well reader, I will once again showcase the Cruiser and Coastal/ Sea Going SS's concurrently and allow you to decide which one is more worthy or if both can and should be implemented. Nonetheless, we can still glean some general traits from these boats as to how Italy overall will perform. Generally speaking, I expect that the cruisers will offer large size and health pools but poor stealth. They'll also feature strong deck gun capabilities (firing SAP of course) typically either 3.9" or 4.7" weapons but favoring smaller numbers of TT's (rarely more than 8). Likewise the medium subs will also have some same features and while they'll be stealthier overall will have similar numbers of TT's and usually only one deck gun. Typically 3.9". Speed will be, well I'll say above average but not best in class. Maneuverability however will be average but they will have best in class in one specific feature; dive speed. This will (hopefully) mimic somewhat the Italian smoke gimmick by allowing the otherwise not very stealthy boats to transition above or below the surface quickly. Offensively the torpedoes will be, like the rest of the Italians lines, slow moving but very long ranged with below average to average damage. An alternate torpedo can also be provided that will be fast and very short ranged to allow for quick strikes that can follow up with the deck guns (ideally). You decide which ones are homing. Now I know what some of you will say "So you basically just want to encourage shotgunning?!" Well yes and no. Obviously a fast, short ranged torpedo would do exactly that but given the salvos we're talking here plus again, weak-ish fish menas unless you're specifically targeting low health ships or just get lucky with a detonation, that's a very high risk maneuver if you are caught. Anyway enough game theory, let's have a look at the boats shall we? Tier VI (Cruiser): Balilla-class / (Medium): Perla-class * No schematic drawing of the Balilla, so have this photo instead. The Balilla-class were one of the first classes of submarine commissioned after WWI remarkably, launched in 1927. They were true ocean going types, meant for operations in the Red Sea and Indian ocean which they never saw service in, and instead were just turned into transport submarines. Displacement comes in at a healthy 1427/1874 tonnes and was armed with six 21" TT's in the usual 4 fore and 2 aft arrangement. The deck gun was a oddity though, as it was initially armed with a very short 27 calibre 4.7" OTO but were later upgraded to a proper 45 calibre one. Might make for a good hull upgrade feature? Anyway as for the Perla this is one of the infamous 600t series boats, most of which are pretty iterative in design. I simply picked the 3rd series ships to represent here as a nice 'middle of the road' option, but I wouldn't be surprised if any of the other subclasses were chosen here over Perla. 620/844 tonnes displacement and yet again, 6 TT's with 4 in front and 2 in back. You do get a 3.9" gun though, which is nice. Tier VIII (Cruiser): Calvi-class / (Medium): Flutto-class The Pietro Calvi-class were in essence just embiggened and improved Balilla-class boats and were meant to perform the exact same mission. Displacement now rises to 1525/2028 tonnes and the armament while not bigger is simply more-er. 8 TT's now in the typically Italian 4 fore and 4 aft layout. And instead of just one 4.7" gun here we see two. Overall this ship is a perfect linear development to put in our tier VIII cruiser slot. With regards to the Flutto, this class now becomes something very different. Although they were ostensibly based on the design of the last 600t boat, the Fluttos were designed with wartime experience in mind. Larger, faster with better seagoing capabilities and improved constructability saw four dozen of these ships get planned with the intent that they would single handedly replace all previous coastal boats. Sadly by the time of the armistice, only around a dozen or so boats had been completed. Displacement came in at 930/1093 tonnes which is still light for a tier VIII but still 300 or so tonnes heavier than the preceding Perlas. Armament unfortunately, remains unchanged from the previous class. Now some of you theorycrafters out there might be thinking "Really? Flutto? That's the best you can come up with? Where's the Marcello? Or the Marconi-class? Arguably the most successful and well known Italian submarines of the war! Why not those ships?!?!" A fantastic and fair question frankly. So lets talk for a moment about the Marconi-class: These rather attractive looking boats were technically cruisers in the sense they were meant to be ocean going patrollers. Buuuuuut, they only displaced ~1190/1465 tonnes and carried the ol' reliable 3.9" deck gun rather than the big boi 4.7". Otherwise torpedo armament was the same as the above Calvi, with 4 forward and 4 aft tubes for a total of 8. The slightly older Marcello-class, which the Marconi's were based on featured double deck guns but were otherwise similar. These boats were considered the best Italian submarines of WWII and one Marconi in particular, the Leonardo da Vinci was the highest scoring non-German submarine of the entire battle of the Atlantic and Italy's top scoring submarine of the war overall with over 120k tons of allied shipping sunk. So why, oh why wouldn't I just make a line out of those and older boats?!?! One simple reason: tier X. Well, okay two reasons the other being I really think LdV needs to be made a premium so there's that. So let us see what horrors await us at tier X: Tier X (Cruiser): Cagni-class / (Medium): Vortice / (Wildcard): G/B/T series (Torricelli-class) So, the Cagni. These massive cruisers were designed specifically for commerce raiding in the open ocean so even calling them 'Cruiser Submarines' isn't really correct. Displacing a hefty 1653/2136 tonnes they were considered fast, highly seaworthy and generally excellent boats. Due to the specific mission they were tasked with, the main armament is uh, interesting to say the least! Fourteen, yes 1,4 TT's of not 21" but rather 18"! Why? Because they felt such a torpedo was enough to sink an unarmored merchant, plus they could fit more torpedoes by being smaller. 8 tubes foreword and 6 aft gives you a lot of ways to scare the bujesus out of people but I'd imagine these torpedoes would have low range and damage due to being well, 18" torpedoes. And to top it all off, two 3.9" not 4.7" guns on the deck, again for the same reason as the torps. This ship could, could have the potential of being a monster and it would certainly be an unique experience at tier X for sure! But does that unique experience gel with the other boats that came before it? Personally, I'm not so sure and if it were up to me it'd be a tier X premium. Maybe you think differently though, maybe the small caliber armament can be overlooked if gimmicked up appropriately? I'll leave that up to you dear reader. As for the Vortice, This is actually a Flutto-class boat that was, er saved from demolition by being a floating battery charger. In reality, she was used as a secret training submarine until 1952 when all pretenses were dropped (in large part due to the irony that Italy was both a founding member of NATO and not allowed to build or operate submarines) and she could be used properly. During this time she was completely rebuilt with modern features but sadly, this meant that her rear TT's had to go so her armament only consists of the 4 forward TT's. As an upgrade to the older, wartime Flutto's, this is a sensible follow on sort of. But once again the armament vexes us, as the torpedoes would have to be massively buffed to give her parity with other tier X SS's even other 'coastal' ones. This just leaves us with Yup G/B/T boats yet again. I chose the Torricelli's because they are Balao's and one of them did keep it's 5" gun so that's, something? The real question becomes though, where and how would you implement these ships? They are large enough to be considered a cruiser, yes. So that's one option, hell they could even be used to follow on from Marcello if you really want to go that route! Then you'd just need a tier VI to flesh out that lineup (Spoiler alert: It'd be the Pisani-class). But the bigger question at hand is; is that what we want? Yet another American top tier submarine in another nations SS line? Sadly, there's no good answer to this and none of these 3 options are truly ideal. But in the end, Italy nonetheless deserves to stand alongside the other great sea powers with their own unique subs, in whatever form that takes. So it was exhaustive, but there we have it. Italy. Let me know what you think below! Do you want to see the intermediate Ocean going subs represented? Do those tier X ships work for you? Anyway stay tuned for the next installment where I tackle, the French.

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!

It's been quite awhile since the Italian Destroyer Containers were obtainable, during the Italian Destroyers Event. I was wondering when will the containers be added to the Armory and Premium Shop for purchase, so for the people who didn't complete their collection may do so? P.S. I understand that it states that the containers will be added to the game in a future update, but it just seems like it's taking much longer than the other containers that were tied to a newly released line of ships. For example, the German Battlecruiser Event's containers seemed to have been added to the shop after two patches post-event.

I earned the Tier 4 from Prime. Boosted captain to 14 points. I had the Yolo Emilio and the other premium dd. The tier 4 I cannot make work, not at all. On the other hand, The tier 2 I got this morning is AMAZING..... WHY CAN'T THEY ALL BE THIS GOOD? 2 matches, average of 1819 exp, 58k and 6 kills.... Average... Please rethink the ROF...

I am here to share how I think an italian dd line would go bear in mind the ships wouldnt be as historically accurate with potential torpedo tube increases similar to EU DDs and the Rof on the guns are ahistorical and made up by me . the torpedoes are also the ones from their cruiser counterparts but with range ,damage and speed adjustments Gimmicks High hitpoint pools for their tier HE shells and SAP Standard line Has acess to either exhaust Smoke or Normal smoke Esploratori line Uses emergency engine power instead of engine boost Mostly low detection ranges due to the short lengths of most ships Slow outside of engine boost on most ships and Tier 2: Sella First of the two sella class ships in the tree represents the sella class as completed 1x2 1x1 120mm gun 6 second reload 2x2 533 mm torpedoes Tier 3 :Bettino Ricasoli second of the sella class ships represented represents the modifications done to the sella class same as sella but trades the single mount for another twin mount gun Tier 4 :Sauro gains two triple torpedo tubes instead of twins slight increase in gun Rof to 5.5 seconds Tier 5: Turbine gains more aa,speed and torpedo damage compared to sauro Tier 6 : Folgore gets an increase in gun RoF to 5 seconds and torpedo damage From here it branches off into two distinct lines Similar to German Destroyers. Esploratori Line these destroyers have more guns and higher speed compared to their normal counterparts but suffer from less aa defenses compared to the normal line Tier 7 : Luca Tarigo a Navigatori Class Destroyer that has 3x2 120mm guns gaining an extra turret over folgore RoF slightly increased to 4.8 have the same dpm as Maestrale and Torpedo Damage increased over folgore Tier 8 :Comandante Toscano The first of the Commandanti Medaglie d' Oro Class , She uses 4 5.3 inch guns in single turrets with 6 torpedo launchers 5.3 inch guns have 5 second reload Tier 9 : Comandante Giorgis part of the second group of Commandantis She gains another 5.3 inch gun over Toscano 5.3 inch guns have 5 second reload Tier 10 : Atilio Regolo A Capitani Romani Class esploratori compared to her predecesors she featured increased gun and torpedo armament Similar to paolo emilio but loses a quadruple launcher to have all of them centerline with increased gun Rof to about 7 seconds Standard Line These destroyers can swap between a normal smoke generator and exhaust smoke and have faster firing 120 mm guns Tier 7 : Maestrale RoF on guns goes down to 4.2 seconds same torpedoes as luca tarigo Tier 8 : Oriani Rof goes to 4 seconds and torpedo damage goes up Tier 9 : Artigliere Rof goes to 3.5 seconds and torpedo damage goes up Tier 10 : Carabinere Gains another turret to Artigliere

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?

Did someone forget them for naval battles?

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.

Will Guilio Cesare ever be back for sale?

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

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~

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

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

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?

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.

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

I have received tidings about the CV lines rework changes, and by my gut feeling, it seems to have mixed feelings within the community. Even though I'm not clear about the entire situation regarding this matter. So feel free to fill me in, since I have been on hiatus for nearly a year. However, the one thing is very certain - other than just reducing workload stress on matchmaking & balancing management, is that the remaining nations' tech tree that has limited choices of CV projects to slot into the current CV line are finally make possible for both Soviet, German, French & Italian combined in the future. Especially Italy, they got too little choice to make a complete CV line, whereas the other three nations got enough selections to compose a single complete CV line. Since the reworked CV line now goes by an even number order of IV - VI - VIII - X, it is now made easier for them to fit in any respective paper CVs enough to complete a single CV line. More than that, it becomes much less stressful for both devs & us to dump in any potential carrier-borne planes for those CVs (possibly the main reason the devs had so much stress & strain to actually work on CVs). At long last, the underdog nations can finally see the light from the dark tunnel once again.

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)

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

Please note that the descriptions I give of them are not what I'd propose of them in-game, Rather they're their historical characteristics. (the only exception being that of their Aircraft loadouts) Possible Tier IV: Sparviero For quite some time both Mussolini and Supermarina never considered the carriers as useful asset, considering the land bases sufficient. After the victories achieved by the British thanks to their carriers(Taranto and Matapan the two with the biggest impact) finally they decided to develop carriers to support the fleet. Since there wasn't time to build a carrier from scratch the engineers had to develop designs from existing hulls. Two liners were chosen to be converted: Roma and Augustus. Augustus, renamed Falco and then Sparviero, had a more conservative conversion in the end, based on the previous emergency conversion of Roma developed back in 1936: the propulsion system remained the same(based on four diesel engines generating 28.000 hp in total) while the superstructure was removed to make room for the flight deck. She had only one hangar and two elevators and no island was placed. The construction started in September 1942 and very little was done by the time of the Armistice. She was then captured by the Germans to be scuttled in 5/10/1944 in the port of Genoa. After WWII she was raised and scrapped. Standard displacement: 23000 tons Full load displacement: 28000 tons Length: 202.4(water line), 216,65 m(overall) Beam: 25 m(water line), 30 m max Draught: 9.2 m Installed power: 28000 hp Maximum speed: 18 knots Protection: 60-80 mm(belt) Aircraft: 34 Fighter-bombers, Capable of mounting Bombs, or a singular Torpedo. Original armament: 6x152/45, 4x1 102/45, some AA Reworked armament: 8x1 135/45, 12x1 65/64, 4x6 20/65 Tier V: Francesco Caracciolo Unfortunately there is little information on this Vessel's development seeing as she was scrapped very early in it's development (The Hull was constructed and launched, but never completed.) and as such there's little information on her, there is some documentation on her but it's not available online to my knowledge, and instead is in Italian Naval Archives. There were two planned design schemes for her, The first (and earlier proposal, which could serve as a A hull, is reminiscent of that of Langley. while the second proposed "refit"/updated layout is more akin to Bouge)This is what I've gathered about her: Variant A: Displacement: 24,922 t light; 25,542 t standard; 28,236 t normal; 30,277 t full load Loading submergence 1,310 tons/feet Dimensions: 695.54 ft x 98.43 ft x 26.25 ft (normal load) 212.00 m x 30.00 m x 8.00 m Armament: Airgroup of 72: 3 squadrons of 12 Fighters. 1 squadrons of 12 Reconaissance. 2 squadrons of 12 Torpedo bombers. 16 - 130mm / 50 guns carried in 2 single and 7 duple mounts 40 - 13.7 mm machine guns carried in 6 quaduple and 8 duple mounts Armor: Belt 5.91" / 150 mm, upper belt 3.94" / 100 mm, ends unarmoured Belts cover 95 % of normal area Main gun shields 0.79" / 20 mm Armour deck 3.94" / 100 mm, Conning tower 2.76" / 70 mm Torpedo bulkhead 1.57" / 35 mm Machinery: Oil fired boilers, steam turbines, Geared drive, 4 shafts, 130,000 shp / 96,980 Kw = 30.29 kts Range 5,000nm at 20.00 kts Aircraft: 25 Fighter-bombers, Capable of mounting Bombs, or a singular Torpedo. Variant B: Displacement: 27,085 t light; 27,986 t standard; 32,953 t normal; 36,927 t full load Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught 822.75 ft / 787.40 ft x 98.43 ft x 27.56 ft (normal load) 250.77 m / 240.00 m x 30.00 m x 8.40 m Aircraft: 30 Fighter-bombers, Capable of mounting Bombs, or a singular Torpedo. Armament: 16 - 5.12" / 130 mm guns (8x2 guns), 70.55lbs / 32.00kg shells, 1927 Model Breech loading guns in deck mounts with hoists on side ends, evenly spread 16 - 2.56" / 65.0 mm guns in single mounts, 9.00lbs / 4.08kg shells, 1927 Model Quick-firing guns in deck mounts with hoists on side ends, evenly spread 32 - 1.46" / 37.0 mm guns (12 mounts), 2.20lbs / 1.00kg shells, 1927 Model Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts on the side and amidships Armour: - Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg) Main: 5.91" / 150 mm 428.54 ft / 130.62 m 11.91 ft / 3.63 m Ends: Unarmoured Upper: 3.94" / 100 mm 459.32 ft / 140.00 m 16.40 ft / 5.00 m Main Belt covers 84 % of normal length Upper belt covers lower hangar for its entirety. - Torpedo Bulkhead: 1.38" / 35 mm 428.67 ft / 130.66 m 25.13 ft / 7.66 m - Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max) Main: 1.57" / 40 mm 1.18" / 30 mm - 2nd: 0.79" / 20 mm 0.39" / 10 mm - 3rd: 0.79" / 20 mm - - - Armour deck: 3.94" / 100 mm, Conning tower: 5.91" / 150 mm Machinery: Oil fired boilers, steam turbines, Geared drive, 4 shafts, 140,000 shp / 104,440 Kw = 30.66 kts Range 5,940nm at 24.00 kts Tier VI: Project Gagnotto Full load displacement: 25630 tons Lenght: 235,4 m(overall lenght), 215,4 m(between perpendiculars) Beam: 29 m Draught: 7,5 m Installed power: 65000 hp Maximum speed: 26 knots Number of planes: 48 Fighter-bombers, Capable of mounting Bombs, or a singular Torpedo. Armament: 4x2 120/50, 4x2 100/47, unknown small-arms AA Tier VII: Project Bonfiglietti Standard load displacement: 15240 tons Full load displacement: 17540 tons Lenght: 220 m(overall lenght), 210 m(between perpendiculars) Beam: 23 m Draught: 5,55 m Installed power: 70000 hp Maximum speed: 29 knots Number of planes: 47 Fighter-bombers, Capable of mounting Bombs, or a singular Torpedo. Protection: 60 mm(citadel), 50 mm(fuel tanks), 20 mm(hangar belt), 35 mm(flight deck), 15 mm(splinter deck), 40 mm(hangar deck) Armament: 4x2 152/53 Mod 1926, 8x2 100/47, unknown small-arms AA Tier VIII Aquila Class Ships in class Aquila Laid down 1927, reconstructed 1943 Europa Laid down 1927, reconstructed 1944 (I could only find references to a planned proposal for Europa, as I haven't yet come across her Blueprints or Schematics as of yet, and seem to find next to nothing on it's existence) Displacement: 24,023 t light; 24,738 t standard; 28,742 t normal; 31,945 t full load Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught 757.09 ft / 721.78 ft x 91.86 ft (Bulges 98.43 ft) x 27.23 ft (normal load) 230.76 m / 220.00 m x 28.00 m (Bulges 30.00 m) x 8.30 m Armament: 16 - 2.99" / 76.0 mm guns (8x2 guns), 13.39lbs / 6.07kg shells, 1943 Model Automatic rapid fire guns in deck mounts with hoists on centerline ends, evenly spread, all raised mounts - superfiring 24 - 1.46" / 37.0 mm guns (6x4 guns), 1.55lbs / 0.70kg shells, 1943 Model Anti-aircraft guns in deck mounts on the side, all amidships 40 - 0.98" / 25.0 mm guns (10x4 guns), 0.48lbs / 0.22kg shells, 1943 Model Machine guns in deck mounts on the side, evenly spread Armor: - Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg) Main: 1.42" / 36 mm 375.33 ft / 114.40 m 16.40 ft / 5.00 m Ends: 1.42" / 36 mm 346.42 ft / 105.59 m 16.40 ft / 5.00 m Main Belt covers 80 % of normal length Main belt does not fully cover magazines and engineering spaces - Torpedo Bulkhead and Bulges: 2.36" / 60 mm 375.33 ft / 114.40 m 22.97 ft / 7.00 m - Gun armor: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max) Main: 1.18" / 30 mm 0.79" / 20 mm 0.79" / 20 mm 2nd: 0.39" / 10 mm 0.39" / 10 mm - 3rd: 0.39" / 10 mm - - - Armour deck: 2.95" / 75 mm, Conning tower: 2.76" / 70 mm Machinery: Oil fired boilers, steam turbines, Geared drive, 4 shafts, 152,000 shp / 113,392 Kw = 33.03 kts Range 6,000nm at 25.00 kts Aircraft: 60 Fighter-bombers, Capable of mounting Bombs, or a singular Torpedo. Radar equipment: 1 EC.3 / ter "Owl" Planes Developed for Italian Carrier Usage: G.50 A/N A project which was developed for Sparviero and Francesco Caracciolo. Considering how the planes are currently placed finding a spot for this particular aircraft will be quite challenging, being too strong for the fighters carried by the tier IV CVs but too weak to compete against the ones carried by the tier VI CVs (considering the upgraded ones). It would act as a fast but fragile hard-hitting fighter-bomber (something which in theory would give an unique flavor to the Italian CV line (and would somewhat compensate for the lack of numbers), being able to carry out both the role of the fighter and of the dive bombers (with a 250 kg bomb as payload). Re.2001 OR It would placed at tier VII(upgraded) and tier VIII(stock). This plane was able to carry a 640 kg AP bomb, derived from the 15" shells of the 381/50(the gun of the Littorio-class) or a 600 kg torpedo. Ideally it would be the only type of plane carried. The main idea/flavor for an Italian branch of CVs would be this: Basically they only get Fighter-Bomber squadrons (Yes as a fourth class of planes exclusive to the Italians) Their planes would be much more fragile than that of all their counterparts, but to make up for this fact their planes would have un-paralleled speed (something Italian planes were actually known for in WW2). Being able to easily have the capabilities to decide engagements with the enemy carrier, but are much more susceptible to damage from AA fire due to their lower HP. And similar to USN CV's having to choose between AP or HE bombs before a match you have to choose if you want your Fighter-bombers all armed with Torpedoes or AP Bombs (yes they're all equipped with either one or the other). And to drop their payload you just click on a enemy ship, I.E. Auto-drop. Now of course you might imagine that having the ability to both dogfight and attack enemy ships would make every other class/type of plane irrelevant, when in reality that couldn't be further from the truth. It's rather more of a "Jack of all trades, masters of none" situation, I.E. While and although having the ability to do everything such as Strafe, dogfight, and drop their payloads, this comes with one major flaw: No manual drop. Yes that's right, the reason being that the "Manual control" would be Strafing, now of course there is a slight compensation for this (of course) you do have slightly better Dispersion-Ellipsis on your Bombs using auto-drop than your USN and IJN counterparts, but worse than them using manual-drop. Your torpedoes drop slightly closer than your IJN and USN counterparts auto-drop but not drop as close as you can using Manual drop whilst still having enough distance for the torpedo to arm. Though this is just my own idea and speculation and I'd like to hear your thoughts on ways to modify/improve/edit it if you have any.