Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'italy'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

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

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Discord


Twitter


Website URL


Instagram


YouTube


Twitch


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 12 results

  1. Wargaming doesn't just make fictional ships, it makes whole CLASSES of fictional ships! The following is a review of Giuseppe Verdi, the tier IX premium Italian battleship, was sponsored by my patrons on Patreon who helped me afford this ship. To the best of my knowledge, the statistics discussed in this review are current as of patch 0.11.2. Please be aware that her performance may change in the future. The purpose of this review is to support the players, not the company behind the product. Posting this review is not an endorsement of current goings on nor is it a statement about them. Giuseppe Verdi was released at the tail end of 2021 without much fanfare. I had hoped to review her immediately following my look at Marlborough. I could piggyback a bunch of graphics I had done for the British-chonker and even sneak some of my earlier Marco Polo graphics to speed up production. But then I got it in my head that I should finally get around to properly evaluating anti-aircraft DPS for the sake of tidying up future reviews. The idea seemed sound -- produce an active database of relative efficiency of AA DPS in World of Warships. Little would I appreciate just how big of a job that would prove to be and as such, Giuseppe Verdi's review sat in a "not even halfway finished" limbo as the days rolled by. Following Dido and Canarias' review, I had a brief window to squeeze another review out before patch 0.11.2 dropped, so I've done what I can to get this out the door in a timely manner. As is becoming increasingly commonplace, I grossly underestimated just how big of a job this project would be and I've spent more time with Giuseppe Verdi than I thought. Given that she's a ship that was largely dismissed by the community when she first arrived, this attention is perhaps undeserving. However, I feel this time has been well spent. Giuseppe Verdi surprised me. I hope you find this review worthwhile. I'm not expecting this review to change your mind about the ship, but maybe you'll learn something new. Oh, and keep this copy by Wargaming in mind. This is how they advertised the damn thing. We'll come back to it later. Quick Summary: A short-ranged Italian battleship with nine 406mm guns with HE shells, SAP-firing secondaries and an improved Exhaust Smoke Generator. PROS Dispersed armour scheme High velocity shells and good AP penetration HE shells deal increased module damage. Good gun handling and decent fire arcs. SAP armed secondaries. Competitive agility for a high-tier battleship Improved Exhaust Smoke Generator CONS Exposed citadel with easily overmatched turtleback Small hit point pool for a tier IX battleship Wonky dispersion Anemic HE shells and poor AP DPM. Short ranged main and secondary gun batteries. Crappy AA defences Differences Between Sisters Giuseppe Verdi borrows heavily from Marco Polo. She has identical durability, agility, anti-aircraft and detection parameters. The primary difference between the two vessels comes in the form of their firepower. Giuseppe Verdi's guns reload faster but don't hit as hard and her secondaries are significantly improved. In addition, the two ships have different consumables. The specific differences between the two vessels are: Canarias is only the most recent victim of weird shell weight nerfs. Before her, Giuseppe Verdi was attacked! Marco Polo on the left and Giuseppe Verdi on the right. Overview Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / CHALLENGING / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / HIGH / Extreme I struggled a bit on where to slot Giuseppe Verdi for inexperienced players. Her exposed citadel and advertised secondaries sounds like a recipe for disaster. I had to conclude that if you played her as advertised, you were in for a rough time. The moment you try and bring those secondaries to bear, you also expose Giuseppe Verdi's weaknesses. Her guns don't perform well. Her citadel protection falls apart. However, were you to keep Giuseppe Verdi at a comfortable distance, then her initial skill floor drops down to a Casual rating. There's nothing much to worry about there short of "don't flash your sides" and vary your ammunition as needs be. Giuseppe Verdi has a very high skill ceiling, almost enough to warrant an Extreme rating. The extra level of game play provided by her Exhaust Smoke Generator when paired with possible brawling builds is just that much more enticing for players with a broad knowledge of systems and mechanics in World of Warships, especially spotting and auto-ricochet angles. This is a battleship with just that extra bit of special sauce which allows you to outplay others with its expanded toolkit. Options There are a couple of things to keep an eye on with Giuseppe Verdi. The first is her improved Exhaust Smoke Generator, which is so far unique in World of Warships. The second comes down to how you choose to build her -- wether that follows your more traditional battleship build or if you go down the brawling-battleship rabbit hole. Consumables Her Exhaust Smoke Generator is weird. Damage Control Party is standard for an Italian battleship. It comes with unlimited charges, an 80s reset timer and a 15 second action time. Her Repair Party is also standard. It heals back up to 14% of the ship's health over 28 seconds, queuing 10% of citadel damage, 50% of penetration damage and 100% of everything else. It has an 80s reset timer and starts with four charges. Her Exhaust Smoke Generator is something special. I'll do a quick side by side comparison with the one that comes on Lepanto, the tier IX Italian tech-tree battleship, which we'll use as our "normal" version of the consumable. Like the standard consumable, Giuseppe Verdi's version starts with 3 charges and it has a 180 second reset timer. But after that, things deviate. Giuseppe Verdi's version creates huge smoke clouds, 1.8km across! Lepanto's are 1.02km across. Furthermore, Giuseppe Verdi issues smoke for longer, pooping out clouds for 60 seconds instead of 45 seconds. And finally, the clouds take longer to dissipate. Normally, Italian Exhaust Smoke Generator clouds disappear within 10 seconds of being generated. You have a bit more leeway with Giuseppe Verdi as they last 15 seconds. In her final slot, you have the choice between a Spotter Aircraft and a Catapult Fighter. The Spotter Aircraft comes with four charges, increases her main battery range by 20% for 100s and has a 240s reset timer. Her Catapult Fighter launches 3 aircraft which stay on station, orbiting the ship at a range of 3km for 60s. It comes with three charges and has a 90s reset timer. Upgrades Let's do this! It's decision time. Start with Main Armaments Modification 1. Damage Control System Modification 1 is the only one that makes sense in slot 2. It's a shame she can't take some kind of smoke-making-better upgrade. You've got to choose your Destiny in slot three. The most efficient choice is Aiming Systems Modification 1, especially with how wonky Italian ballistics are. BUT, if you're going to be a CHAD-BRAWLER, then take Secondary Battery Modification 1 instead for the extra range and rate of fire. Damage Control System Modification 2 is the best choice in slot three. You can take Steering Gears Modification 1 instead if you want, but be prepared to burn. Still, for someone intent on brawling and knife fighting, it's not a terrible choice. Concealment System Modification 1 is still the only choice worth considering in slot five. And finally, you can choose between Main Battery Modification 3 to help with her shoddy reload or Gun Fire Control System Modification 2 to make up for her lacklustre range. Commander Skills Now OBVIOUSLY, the optimal build here is the same tried, tested and true battleship survivability-focused commander. You specialize in fire-resistance with your choice of skills at the lower, mandatory tiers. It's worth noting that for Italian battleships especially, the second tier Brisk is particularly effective. The extra jump in speed kicks in everytime they activate their Exhaust Smoke Generator, on top of the extended periods of time between their salvos owing to their longer (and sometimes downright punitive) main battery reload times. As a nerd that has spent way too much time twirling ships, I like the extra kick it provides to a ship's rate of turn. With Giuseppe Verdi's smoke lasting longer than other Italian battleships, she stands to benefit from this longer and getting her up to X knot top speeds is thrilling. It's like combining Engine Boost to your Exhaust Smoke Generator. Very fun. But SURELY you didn't come here for optimization; you came for AWESOME. I know your type. You're a Giga-Chad who plays a secondary-spec'd Montana. You're the Boss-[edited] who took Survivability Expert on your battleships. Well, Giuseppe Verdi will not let you down. Her SAP-firing secondaries are SCREAMING for a dedicated commander build to fully optimize the ship, citadel exposure be damned. Well, worry not my valiant, hyper-morphed blokes and lasses, I've got your needs covered. Brisk comes up once again as an excellent skill for this build. Secondaries don't increase a ship's spotting radius in smoke, allowing Giuseppe Verdi to close to knife fighting range while still delivering the hurt. Between Secondary Armament Modification 1, the November Echo Setteseven signal and the following build, she can yeet her shells out to a respectable 10.51km, making her a threat to anything she wants to flex on. Only Manual Secondary Battery Aiming and Long Range Secondary Battery Shells are truly mandatory for this build, leaving you with lots of options to play around. I'm a fan of pairing this with Concealment Expert and Emergency Repair Expert but you're free to pick and choose your favourites. Obviously, I'm biased towards a secondary build. You'll understand why by the time you get to my Final Evaluation, if not before with my Firepower section. Of course if you elect to use secondary build, that precludes Giuseppe Verdi from being an effective commander trainer for your other Regia Marina battleships. That's a significant strike against her and worth keeping in mind. Camouflage Giuseppe Verdi only has access to a single Type 10 camouflage. It provides the usual bonuses for a tier IX premium battleship: -3% surface detection +4% increased dispersion of enemy shells. -20% to post-battle service costs. +100% to experience gains. Giuseppe Verdi's base camo looks fine. It's helped that Regia Marina battleships look bloody gorgeous. Firepower Main Battery: Nine 406mm/50 guns in in 3x3 turrets with an A-B-X superfiring configuration Secondary Battery: Twelve 152mm/55 guns in 4x3 turrets and twenty-four 90mm/50 guns in 12x2 turrets superfiring over the 152mm guns. These armaments are spread evenly along each side of the ship. Main Battery Let's do things a little different this time and start with the main battery. There's a world of difference between Giuseppe Verdi's main battery firepower and Marco Polo's and it's worth reiterating them. Giuseppe Verdi has a faster reload by 5 seconds. Marco Polo is more precise with 1.9 sigma to Giuseppe Verdi's 1.7. Giuseppe Verdi's AP shells do 450 less damage and are lighter. Marco Polo has SAP shells, Giuseppe Verdi has HE shells. While it's nice that Giuseppe Verdi does not to have Marco Polo's 36 second reload, the rest of the changes suck monkey butts. I mean, I can accept having HE instead of SAP. It's a fair trade for the reload reduction. But, I have to ask just what the heck is going on with her AP shells? 450 less damage on a citadel (149 damage on a penetration) isn't a lot but that makes me wonder why it was even necessary. Now, I do like my consistency so incongruencies bother me more than they should. So I'm left scratching my head at this design decision. I think it points to Wargaming fussing with things that don't matter for the sake of making their "behind the scenes" performance-graphs look pretty. The same goes for a 31 second reload instead of the standard battleship 30 second reload. That smacks of Wargaming looking for optimization so someone can make their bonus rather than a design decision that's to the benefit of the players. That kind of change is a nuisance to players. Seriously, there's been a lot of this unnecessary fidgeting with stats away from established norms and I can't see the reason why. Giuseppe Verdi could have had a 30 second reload and 13,050 damage on her AP shells like her sister and it wouldn't have made an enormous difference -- her DPM would have still sat beneath Hizen's (freakin' Hizen for crying out loud). Wargaming could have bought back their numbers with something that players can't perceive anyway, like a 0.05 sigma reduction or whatever. When is Wargaming going to learn that messing with main battery performance is a sure-fire way to annoy their customers? Giuseppe Verdi isn't winning any prizes for sustained damage output. I'm aware I forgot Prinz Rupprecht. She's at the bottom of both. I'm not redoing these. Again, Prinz Rupprecht is missing, this time because I recycled this from my Marlborough review. She sits beneath Giuseppe Verdi and above Georgia. Speaking of annoying, let's talk about dispersion. Giuseppe Verdi's accuracy is ... well, it's not good. It combines the triple headache of French & Italian dispersion formulas AND Italian high-velocity vertical dispersion AND 1.7 sigma on top of that. Even if you do hit your targets, Giuseppe Verdi is likely to yeet her AP rounds clean through the broadside of a cruiser at anything less than 12km. Now, this is countered by the fact that her AP rounds retain a lot of energy over distance, so smackin' battleships for citadel hits at long range is totally in her wheelhouse... or at least it would be if she could reach out to 20km. You need to activate her Spotter Aircraft or install Gun Fire Control System Modification 2 in order to shoot that far. Her short range is a real pain in the butt sometimes, so ditch the Catapult Fighter and keep the other consumable on standby. You're going need it. If you don't, you'll have to install the range module instead and that's only going to push her DPM potential further down the list. Giuseppe Verdi's dispersion with 1.7 sigma on the left. Marco Polo's with 1.9 sigma (and minor ballistic changes) on the right. Giuseppe Verdi doesn't quite top the charts in terms of her AP penetration for a sixteen-inch gun but it's pretty darned close. She's a threat to battleship citadels up to 20km and beyond. A Curious Note Towards the tail end of this review, I noticed something weird in Giuseppe Verdi's datamined stats. This came from spotting a typo on one of my graphics. I got the HE damage value wrong, so I went back and double checked all of the info for her main battery HE shells just to make sure that I wasn't misquoting other stats. That's when this little value jumped out at me: "Alpha Damage 9,230" Now, Alpha Damage is weird. It's not the same as regular damage. That regular damage value for Giuseppe Verdi appears normal -- it's 5,700. It's the same amount of hurt that Iowa and Missouri spit out with their 406mm guns. Alpha Damage for HE shells is a bit of a holdover from the Closed Beta days where HE shells had a splash effect that could even damage ships on a near miss. To my knowledge, this may have had an effect still on modules (WG never gave me a clear answer on this as a Community Contributor). With the inclusion of submarines taking splash damage from near misses, it was something I had ear marked to explore when I could take submarines into the training rooms finally. So what does this value do? Well, frankly, I don't know. It could mean that Giuseppe Verdi will do more damage to submarines with her HE shells than she should. It could mean that she does more damage to modules (including exposed magazines of destroyers and some cruisers) than her contemporaries. Maybe it's more HE penetration against modules (they have a kind of armour -- module damage is hella weird). It could mean absolutely nothing and it's just a holdover from Closed Beta. Just be aware that she has more of this than Iowa and Missouri (4,620), Thunderer (7,730) or even Incomparable (7,800). I'll make some inquiries and keep you posted. [ Edit - This has been confirmed. Giuseppe Verdi does more module damage than other battleships. ] I'm borrowing this graphic from my Marco Polo review. The two sisters have the same firing angles. They're almost good. Almost. Main Battery Summary Giuseppe Verdi's main battery firepower sucks. She has bad range. Her AP shells have nerfed damage. She has only nine guns and yet she's stuck with an abnormally long reload. Her HE shells aren't SAP and they suck at starting fires. Her dispersion is also terrible. Her guns' redeeming qualities are decent fire arcs and gun handling, good AP penetration over range and you're playing with a larger calibre of gun than you normally can with Italian battleships. Seriously, that last bit is meant to be a selling feature of the ship and it makes me laugh. "Ooh, you get to play with 406mm guns!" Yeah, everyone else already does that and has been doing that since as early as tier VII. 406mm SAP with a bad reload was novel on Marco Polo. Nerfed 406mm AP with a bad reload is just a bad tier IX ship -- being Italian doesn't make that better somehow. Wargaming is obviously banking that her secondaries will make up the deficit. Her Secondaries Don't Make Up the Deficit There are four things I look for when evaluating if a ship's secondaries are worth upgrading into: Range: Look, you gotta have range. I don't care about the rest if a ship can't reach its target. Without range, secondaries are not going to come into play often enough to be worthwhile. The next three are all distant seconds to this first criteria. I cannot stress this enough: without good range, your secondaries suck. End of story. Dispersion: Dispersion helps put more hits on target for few shots. This can be counteracted somewhat by a high volume of fire (more bites of the apple) or meatier individual hits (good penetration / high damage or fire chance per shell). Penetration: Will my hits do damage when I get there? Like Dispersion, this can again be overlooked if the other two boxes are ticked . The idea being that if you don't have good penetration to hurt all targets, landing enough hits may pad the numbers through fires. Potential Damage: This category is kind of a catch-all. It combines volume of fire with fire arcs, shell damage and fire chance per hit. We're evaluating if the ship has the potential to deal a lot of damage -- pretty much, if all of the ducks were in a row, how much hurt can this ship dispense? A ship with poor potential damage may still be a decent contender for a secondary specialization if dispersion and penetration are present -- the idea being that you make up for the deficit by hitting more often and the quality of said hits being higher than average. We can look at a few examples: Prinz Rupprecht has arguably the best secondary battery at tier IX. She combines accurate "Massachusetts" level of accuracy with 1/4 HE penetration. Her 105mm guns fire quickly and her 150mm casemates hit like trucks. With nearly an 8km base range, the only marks against her are the poor firing arcs on her casemates and the fact that her 105mm can't quite penetrate 32mm battleship hull sections without dipping into IFHE. Still, she can do without and rely on fires to carry over the rest. Georgia is a step down from Prinz Rupprecht. Though she dittos the German battlecruiser's accuracy, she has slightly less range. Furthermore, her 127mm/38s don't have the penetration needed to contend with anything short of destroyers and very light cruisers. Dipping into Inertial Fuse for HE Shells allows her to engage cruisers, but this hurts her poor fire-setting ability when facing other battleships, forcing a choice. Her fire arcs, however, are excellent, ensuring she can bring her full secondary broadside on anything that creeps within range. Alsace has the range and massive volume of fire but she lacks everything else. Her penetration is infamously terrible with her 100mm guns unable to directly damage destroyers or the superstructures of ships at tiers VIII+ and her dispersion is just the baseline secondary accuracy which is awful. Still, she's one of the best potential fire starters. Marco Polo has absolutely nothing going for her. On paper, she can deal more potential damage than Georgia but her range is even worse. Furthermore, she inherits Alsace's penetration issues. The bulk of her fire comes from her 90mm guns and they can't hurt anything directly. She's only a modest fire starter and her accuracy is terrible. So where does Giuseppe Verdi fall on this spectrum? Giuseppe Verdi, Marco Polo and Friedrich der Große have the same brawling and kiting DPM. Pommern and Georgia have such good fire arcs that they can fire all of their guns whether kiting or brawling. Giuseppe Verdi's SAP ammunition provides tremendous potential, both through her theoretical DPM but also her high penetration. There's just one problem... SAP Armed Secondaries SAP secondaries are a game changer. On paper, Giuseppe Verdi's secondaries have more damage potential than Alsace's, which is pretty frightening. And this comes paired with high(ish) penetration. Her 152mm secondaries can smack 42mm hull sections and her 90mm can hurt up to 26mm. Pair this with (very) high damage per shell and she appears capable of front-loading some big alpha when her secondaries start singing. I was initially skeptical, expecting most of these shells to ricochet but her 152mm have VERY forgiving bounce angles. Her 90mm are less so, but still highly respectable. This was enough to make me curious. I could accept her not starting fires or damaging internal modules with these kind of stats (you're not detonating anyone with SAP). It stung a bit that her 90mm were stuck at 26mm of penetration -- 27mm would have been preferred to hurt ALL cruisers within her matchmaking, but I could deal with that, especially when her 152mm guns had been buffed with a slightly faster reload over those on her sister ship. Things were looking up. At least, they were until I looked at their range. Lemme dig up that meme I used on my Marco Polo review. There we go. With a 6.95km base range, Giuseppe Verdi's secondaries cap out at a modest 10.51km. That's a kilometre and a half shorter than Alsace and Prinz Rupprecht. That hurts. That sucks. What is it with these Italian battleship premiums post-Cesare being so close to good but fumbling at the last minute? Thus, Giuseppe Verdi ends up having excellent potential damage, good penetration, poor accuracy and, most damning of all, modest range at best, though I'm loathe to call it anything other than 'poor'. It's not that a 10.51km range isn't workable, it very much is, especially if you're a PVE-junky. Giuseppe Verdi's secondaries are boss-level badass in Co-Op and it's not uncommon to see her do in excess of 40,000 damage with her secondaries if you throw her headlong into jousting scenarios with a full secondary build. However, you can't expect this kind of regular performance in PVP where brawling scenarios are less common. Giuseppe Verdi doesn't pair these secondaries with a citadel profile that's healthy in a knife fight. That's not to say that there isn't some use for her secondaries in PVP, it's just not idiot proof the way it is on German battleships. Giuseppe Verdi's ace in the hole when it comes to making use of her secondaries is her Exhaust Smoke Generator. She can blink off people's radar, show up closer than people are expecting and saturate them with a hail of surprisingly damaging fire. This works best against destroyers and cruisers, obviously, and only select cruisers at that. But still, it opens the door for some fun, dynamic and aggressive plays that are so very dear to my blood thirsty heart. You just can't count on it being the trump card that people so often envision brawling to be. I really do like the combination of decent secondaries (I am loathe to say 'good') and an Exhaust Smoke Generator in brawling scenarios. So long as no one brings Hydroacoustic Search or a Surveillance Radar to the party, it's going to be amusing. I can't promise it will be game winning or even a good idea, but it will be amusing. After the disappointment of her main battery armament, having "amusing" secondaries is high praise. If you can fire all six of her 90mm guns at a target, you're showing waaaay too much broadside. Secondary Summary They're better than I initially thought. Their short(er) range is a pain in the butt and really hurts what could have been an impressive and novel armament. It would have been nice to see them reaching out to at least Georgia levels of range (7.5km) or getting at least German battleship levels of accuracy. Still, the way her secondaries synergize with her Exhaust Smoke Generator is a lot of fun, so top marks there. VERDICT: Giuseppe Verdi's offensive capabilities are only "okay". Her main battery firepower is pretty bad compared to her contemporaries and if you're not interested in a secondary-build, then you should probably stay clear of this ship. Durability Hit Points: 69,100 Bow & stern/superstructure/upper-hull/deck: 32mm / 19mm / 70mm to 80mm / 55mm Maximum Citadel Protection: 320mm belt + either 25mm turtleback or 50mm citadel wall Torpedo Damage Reduction: 27% Marco Polo and Giuseppe Verdi share the same hit point pool, which is really generous of them considering it's not very big. Giuseppe Verdi entirely clones Marco Polo's armour and hit point profiles. This means she has a tiny hit point pool for a tier IX battleship, a dispersed armour scheme and a highly vulnerable citadel. Giuseppe Verdi's armour is excellent for resisting cruiser calibre HE, SAP and AP rounds, even the latter two which may have improved auto-ricochet mechanics. Her amidships deck and upper belt are immune to HE rounds from even small battleship calibre weapons, being proof up to 330mm calibre guns. She can similarly shrug off the 1/4 HE penetration of 203mm calibre weapons found on the German cruisers. Similarly, all cruiser-calibre SAP rounds are patently incapable of damaging the ship in these places. This limits the effectiveness of these attacks to her extremities and superstructure. Given the difficulties of accuracy at range, the further away Giuseppe Verdi is from said cruisers, the more effective her armour becomes if only grace of dispersion. Even players who know what to target will find their shells occasionally straying and piffing off Giuseppe Verdi's thick plate ineffectively. Against battleship calibre rounds, she fares alright. She can bow-tank with the best of them, though she has to worry about the usual 460mm+ guns like everyone else. This all changes if she gives up a little too much side, however. Barring having an ice-breaker on her bow and stern, Giuseppe Verdi's external armour is excellent. The citadel protection of the Marco Polo-class isn't great. It's almost good enough. Almost. Against anything 356mm or smaller, it holds up well. Her turtleback is sloped steeply and it prompt ricochets (or at least ricochet checks) against most incoming rounds, deflecting them up and away from her magazines and machine spaces. However, at only 25mm thick, any larger AP shells simply ignores the armour entirely through overmatch mechanics. Similarly, ships with improved auto-ricochet angles like American heavy cruisers and battleships like Duke of York won't bounce off this plate. Granted these two ships in this specific example need to be extra close in order to get through her belt armour, but ships like Stalingrad and the Alaska-class do not. Exposing Giuseppe Verdi's sides is baaaad juju and it's just begging to get her sent back to port from the ensuing big citadel hits. That 25mm turtleback is just begging to be overmatched. It may as well be non-existant for any AP shells greater than 356mm. Flash her sides at your own peril. This raises the point on how it's generally a REALLY STUPID IDEA to bring this ship anywhere close to brawling distances against other battleships in PVP. Like, seriously. You'd have to be a flaming moron to want to engage in knife fights using Giuseppe Verdi and expect her to come out the better for it. Even her Exhaust Smoke Generator can't keep her safe at these ranges (and that won't save you from enterprising blind fires at a distance either, btw). Even if you don't get flashed by Surveillance Radar or sniffed out by a Hydroacoustic Search, the guaranteed detection range will ensure she gets lit. Barring "being the torpedo", you'll have to expose your sides to your quarry (if not their friends) and probably suffer for it. As good as her secondaries (potentially) are, Giuseppe Verdi's citadel protection should make you think twice about getting her anywhere close enough to use 'em. Or you can live fast, die young and leave a beautiful corpse. Up to you. Shut up. I look fabulous. VERDICT: Nice external armour. She doesn't have enough HP, though and her healing suffers because of it. Furthermore, citadel gets tapped too easily especially at brawling distances where WG wants her to be played. Agility Top Speed: 32 knots Turning Radius: 860m Rudder Shift Time: 16 seconds 4/4 Engine Speed Rate of Turn: 4.3º/s at 24.1 knots Main Battery Traverse Rate: 5.0º/s Fourth from the top in bright, booger green. There's nothing really special about Giuseppe Verdi's handling. Her 860m turning radius looks decent. Her 32 knot top speed is good, but she's not the fastest at tier by a long shot. She lacks the Engine Boost consumable which makes Alsace, Wujing, Georgia and the Jean Barts so flexible. And finally, her rudder shift time is only kinda-sorta okay. Plug this all in and you get a ship that isn't exemplary in any one area, but she's not terrible in any of them either. And yet, she strangely feels kinda lame. This is largely owing to the empty niche at high tiers. We have fast battleships but we don't have any nimble ones. Put Giuseppe Verdi at any of the lower tiers and sure, her speed stands out, but her handling would be all kinds of meh by comparison. At tier VII, Gneisenau has a comparable top speed but scrapes off another 30m from her turning radius (and over a second from her rudder shift time), allowing her to manage a comfy 4.5º/s rate of rotation. The German tech tree ship feels fast and aggressive. Yet just a few different paraemeters undermines Giuseppe Verdi. The end result is that she only feels okay. There's room at this tier for Wargaming to play with agility as a perk if they wished. Something with short rudder shift time like Vanguard or Yukon would be welcome, especially if it came with something close to (or just below) an 800m turning cricle radius and around a 30 knot top speed. As it is, Giuseppe Verdi's agility misses the mark here. Because of this, I fell in love with the Swift commander skill in my play tests. Paired with the Sierra Mike signal and her Exhaust Smoke Generator, it gave her a top speed of 37.1 knots in a straight line and a maximum rate of turn of 4.5º/s over a 910m turning circle radius at a sustained turning speed of 26.6 knots (for those unaware, when you exceed your in-port top speed, your turning circle radius increases in size). Giuseppe Verdi can very comfortably come about 180º under the cover of her Exhaust Smoke Generator with time to spare. Furthermore, her Exhaust Smoke Generator ensures she can always have access to this extra speed on demand, allowing her to redeploy even from hotly contested fights. I know I'm making more of a big deal about her synergy with this skill than it perhaps deserves but I was delighted by this pairing and I'ma spread the word to mah peeps. Overall, Giuseppe Verdi's agility is "good enough", I suppose. It's not bad but there are better ships at her tier, like Georgia and Jean Bart. VERDICT: It's not terrible. It's not good either, but it's not terrible. Anti-Aircraft Defence Flak Bursts: 6 + 2 explosions for 1,330 damage per blast at 3.5km to 4.6km. Long Ranged (up to 4.6km): 196dps at 75% accuracy (147dps) Medium Ranged (up to 3.5km): 199.5dps at 75% accuracy (150dps) Short Ranged (up to 2.0km): 206.5dps at 70% accuracy (145dps) Range of Gun Types and DPS Combined AA DPS by Range Look, the only thing "good" going on here is the wall of flak that Giuseppe Verdi puts out and even that's held back by the pathetic short-range of Italian large-calibre batteries. You can count on anything short of dive bombers being able to engage an attack run before they have to consider dodging and that really undermines their efficacy. On paper, she has enough sustained DPS to do some damage to loitering planes (if they loiter), but in practice she's one of the softer battleship targets at her tier. You're pretty much hoping that enemy aircraft will run into a combined flak-wall or be out-muscled by Giuseppe Verdi's DPS paired with something much more frightening, like an American or French battleship. Here's how Giuseppe Verdi's sustained AA DPS holds up against the best three and worst three battleships at her tier. This is the approximate damage done by sustained AA DPS against a fictional, 186.2 knot squadron travelling in a straight line from max range to 0km over a ship. The colours separate the damage done by mount type, with darkest being the large calibre mounts, the medium being the medium calibre and lightest being the small calibre mounts. Iowa (5833) Missouri (5019) Jean Bart & Jean Bart B (4884) Marco Polo & Giuseppe Verdi (2948) Hizen (2157) AL Sovetskaya Rossiya (1914) Musashi (1198) Overall, your best AA defence is going to be to activate her Exhaust Smoke Generator if you come under concerted attack. Make sure you put the rudder hard over to Just Dodge™ any blind drops of rockets, fish, bombs, or Soveit easy-mode ordnance. VERDICT: Not enough so it's entirely forgettable. Vision Control Base/Minimum Surface Detection: 16.8km / 13.2km Base/Minimum Air Detection Range: 12.98km / 10.51km Detection Range When Firing in Smoke: 16.26km Maximum Firing Range: Between 19.12km and 22.18km (max of 26.62km with Spotter Aircraft) 52nd (or 53rd) out of 93 vessels listed here. Giuseppe Verdi (and Marco Polo) have concealment on the poor side of average for a battleship within their matchmaking (the average being an upgraded concealment of 13.05km). That's not surprising given that short of Roma (and her unfortunate AL clone), most Italian battleships tend to have unremarkable surface detection ranges. However, with very few exceptions, it isn't the raw concealment value that's the interesting aspect of a given battleship's vision control -- it's what consumables they bring to the table to shake things up that makes individual ships stand out. With Italian battleships, it's access to their Exhaust Smoke Generator consumable that's their defining feature here. This provides concealment on demand, at least so long as they haven't fired their main battery guns recently. That Marco Polo lacked this consumable at all was a big hit against her comfort-level which was admittedly already suffering due to her punitive reload time on her guns. Well, it seems that Wargaming has taken the Exhaust Smoke Generator Marco Polo should have gotten and added it onto her sister-ship, because Giuseppe Verdi's smoke is strange and powerful. It provides all of the usual benefits for an Italian battleship, giving cover to allow it to disengage and manoeuvre as needs be. With her great secondaries, you can also use it offensively, spitting ribbons of SAP fire into the faces of enemies that get close without being spotted in return -- at least until someone activates Surveillance Radar or Hydroacoustic Search or slips within 2km of her. Still, this can be enough to cause some amusing shenanigans, such as foiling early torpedo attempts and getting a leg up on damage done, especially against the impatient. It might be enough to protect her citadel against some opponents. Exhaust Smoke Generators are a selfish consumable by their very nature. They don't really provide smoke that can be shared by other ships unless you VERY tightly coordinate with a peer. That's nominally beyond the scope of trying to help some Random Battle buddy you meet in a one-off match. The Exhaust Smoke Generator clouds don't last long enough for another ship to hide in them comfortably. Trail behind an Italian battleship by more than a boat length and you're not likely to keep hidden, especially if you're struggling at all to match their exact course and speed. This is where Giuseppe Verdi stands out. Her Exhaust Smoke Generator can be shared. While most Italian Exhaust Smoke Generators create smoke circles that are 1.02km in diameter, Giuseppe Verdi's is a massive 1.8km. The extra duration of each individual cloud also ensures that it lasts long enough for a friendly ship to be able to follow in her wake. Finally, the extra emission time gives a bit more room too coordinate. While this may still be beyond the average player in a pick-up battle, it is enough to provide at least temporary cover and easily too. That can make all of the difference in a Random or Ranked battle. Still, I wouldn't go so far as to say that Giuseppe Verdi's Exhaust Smoke Generator is game changing. It's just that much more comfortable to use and it opens the door for some team play options that didn't readily exist before. Lepanto on top with a standard Exhaust Smoke Generator. Giuseppe Verdi's smoke is large enough to hide a small fleet inside, provided they can keep up. VERDICT: Bad unless you account for her Exhaust Smoke Generator. Then it's at least interesting, if not downright competitive. Anti-Submarine Warfare ASW Armament Type: Airstrike from 1.5km to 10km (plus bomb drop column) Number of Salvos: Up to two Reload Time: 30 seconds Aircraft: Two Kawanishi H8K with 2,000hp per plane. Drop Pattern: 3 bombs each dropped evenly over roughly a 900m column Maximum Bomb Damage: 2,800 Fire Chance: 21% Not much to say here given that submarines were largely a non-entity during my playtesting. I'm recording these stats for posterity and they're likely to change in the future. VERDICT: I'm not looking forward to when this section becomes relevant, if only because these reviews will get even more complicated. #MouseTroubles Final Evaluation Marco Polo, was entirely forgettable and short of Christmas events, I never see any reason to take her out. This is largely owing to Marco Polo's atrocious main battery reload time. Seeing that corrected with Giuseppe Verdi caught my interest, especially when paired with the missing Exhaust Smoke Generator. But when I became aware of the other gunnery flaws, namely the 1.7 sigma, the terrible range, the 31 second reload (for some reason) and nerfed AP rounds, my enthusiasm was dashed. I resigned that she would never be anything more than another forgettable offering from Wargaming, not worth a deep dive. I began framing this review as a quick comparison between the two ships. That was until I took a look at how Wargaming was promoting her. I told you we'd come back to this. What stood out to me was the claims of a powerful secondary armament. Now, I was aware of her development and how she had been touted as having SAP secondaries. But just looking at their range gave me reservations, to say nothing when datamining pulled up that her dispersion wasn't improved. But the more I looked and the more I played Giuseppe Verdi, I felt it wrong to be so dismissive. There was something interesting there. Oh, my forays into trying to make her secondaries work in PVP were largely disastrous -- I'm not about to tell you that Giuseppe Verdi is a good ship, don't you worry. But what I did find was that they were fun, especially in PVE. I don't usually focus on individual game modes much in my reviews but I think it's worth examining here with Giuseppe Verdi. If you are a co-op main, Giuseppe Verdi is a fantastic ship. Secondary-heavy battleships and battleships with torpedoes do extremely well in PVE modes and Giuseppe Verdi is no exception. If you're looking to scratch of some event mission that requires secondary hits, this isn't a bad pony to bet on. In PVP modes, she's only alright though. You can pull off some fun shenanigans every now and then the same way you could with say, Tirpitz or Odin. I just don't feel that her long range fire is good enough to warrant purchasing. Yes, it's nice to have an Italian battleship with 406mm AP rounds AND smoke. But given how heavy handed Wargaming has been to balance her, I don't think she's worth while. Similarly, close combat just doesn't happen often enough in PVP battles to allow you to enjoy what makes her novel. Her shorter ranged secondaries make that even more challenging -- you're getting less secondary incidental fire than you would from any other specialist and that's a shame. I want to like Giuseppe Verdi, but I cannot in good conscious recommend her for anyone that enjoys Random and Ranked Battles. She's not terrible. She's certainly more novel than her sister ship, but I'ma stick to my guns. Give her a pass if you're a PVP junky. Thanks for reading. Mouse out. <Sinister pasta noises!>
  2. skull_122_steel

    Aquila Suggestion

    We are sooner or later getting the Aquila in game, there is really no point in not adding it even if they never add an Italian CV line. These are just my ideas on how she can work/ gimmick she could have. If tier VI, she should have RE 2001 CB as aircraft (as I'm pretty sure they could take off from a flight deck but the TA 152 are also CV planes so who cares), as the Italians had no self-made rockets for planes, she wouldn't have any attack squadrons. Also, because the Re's couldn't carry torps no torp bombers as well. she would have skip bombers with 2 100 Kg sap bombs per plane, two planes per attack, six planes in a squadron. as well, she would have AP dive bombers with a 250 Kg bomb, two planes per attack, six plane in a squadron. If tier VIII, she should have G 55s as aircraft. As the G 55s could carry a torpedo she would get a torpedo bomber squadron. one torp per plane, three planes per attack, nine planes per squadron. the armaments for the other squadrons remain the same but they have one more aircraft per attack and three more in a squadron. The main gimmick for her that I would want her to have, is the SAP skip bombers. I see them as an inaccurate shot gun to use against lighter ships while the AP bombers and torps are for the heavier ones.
  3. Currently there are 3 ~ 4.5 Italian DDs in the game. ( depending on how pedantic one is ) Tier 3 Pan EU - Romulus / Spica class Tier 6 Italian - Leone / Leone class ( more of a "light cruiser" ) Tier 9 Italian - Paolo Emilio / Capitani Romani class ( is a light cruiser, technically ) Tier 9 Soviet* - Tashkent ( Italian in mostly all but armament ) Tier 6 Soviet** - Gnevny / Project 7 ( built by USSR with Italian assistance) So here comes the speculative part: Tier 2 ~ 4 , armed with 76 mm, 100 mm or 102 mm guns and 450mm torpedoes Tier 4 ~ 7 armed with 120 mm guns and 533 mm torpedoes Tier 7 ~ 10 armed with 135 mm and 533 mm torpedoes Updated List: Tier 2 Rosolino Pilo / Generali class ( "full speed smoke" + "standard speed boost" +8% up to tier 5 ) Tier 3 Curatone class Tier 4 Sella class Tier 5 Sauro / Turbine class ( Euro think of the memes and "torpedo beats"... ) Tier 6 Freccia / Folgore class ( starting tier 6, will need +30% engine boost for ~60 sec. and "full speed smoke" ) Tier 7 Maestrale / Oriani / Soldati class ( will have to be Soldati "2nd batch"/ 5 gun armed ones ) Tier 8 Comendate Medaglie d'Oro class ( 2nd batch of 5 gun armed ships or "fictional" torpedo armament or both ) Tier 9 Impetuoso class with "fictional armament" or d'Oro derived design ( fictional in a sense of DP 135mm guns ) Tier 10 Impetuoso class with "fictional armament" or d'Oro derived design ( fictional in a sense of DP 135mm guns ) Original Tier List Disclaimer: All of the information above is pure speculation, based on publicly available information and is NOT a "financial advice". Please read this "with a giant grain freighter load of salt".
  4. P51pilot122

    Italian BB Impressions

    So, Italian battleships are in early access, and I've already gotten and began playing the Doria, Veneto, and Lepanto. Haven't touched the Cavour and Dante, was quite disappointed that the Cavour's B hull isn't the refit, but the refit may be too strong for Tier 5 so that's fair enough. Despite what people have said, I saw it fit to play the ships myself and see what I thought of them, and honestly, they're not that as bad as everyone is making them out to be... Andrea Doria - Tier VI Right off the bat, I'm going to say Doria has been the best in the line so far, she's a solid ship at tier 6. She boasts the Cesare's small size and good maneuverability, but can have a better rudder shift thanks to the rudder shift module. She's tough when angled, and thanks to her turn speed, can easily dodge salvos and angle herself, but is fragile when broadside on, like every other Italian ship in the game. She has quite good concealment with camo and CE, at 12.1km. Speaking of concealment on these Italian BBs, these ships really love the Dead Eye skill, with their good concealment values, they're easily able to take advantage of the accuracy buff without having to border hump, they can easily duke it out in mid range (12-14km) gunnery duels with other BBs. Speaking of guns, Doria's aren't too bad in my experience so far. In fairness, it takes hundreds of battles to fully understand what a ship is like in this game, but this is about first impressions so, that's what I'm giving. Doria's guns are nearly identical to Cesare, but with lower sigma if I'm not mistaken. Unlike other ships in the line, she has a much more reasonable 30 second reload and her turret traverse is delightful, being 30 seconds to rotate 180 degrees with Grease the Gears. Her accuracy hasn't been too bad on my end thus far, gunnery with Doria has been delightful if I'm being honest, Dead Eye makes this ship a joy to play as well. AP performance is solid, it can easily blap cruisers at this tier and really mess up BBs who broadside you, SAP is capable of doing big damage as well, angled BBs are in for an unwelcome surprise when a Doria blaps your super structure for 10-12k damage. Her range is a bit short, but Sansonetti makes for an awesome partner on these ships, just like Roma. Secondaries were a welcome surprise, the 135s on each side can fire nearly directly ahead and can dish out decent damage, and the 90s are decent fire starters and fire pretty quick without any upgrades or skills. Overall, I've really enjoyed the Doria would go as far as to say she's the brightest light in this line, and also she's gorgeous with her perma camo, just a jawdroppingly beautiful battleship. Vittorio Veneto - Tier VIII Now this, is a ship I have so eagerly awaiting to arrive, I bought Roma day one because she was well, Roma, but a Littorio class battleship as well. My brief time with Veneto was... not as enjoyable as Doria was. She boasts pretty much all of Roma's good traits, awesome gun handling, tanky armor as long as you're not broadside on, great firing arcs, fast, and still stealthy despite having less concealment than Roma. Although, her 34 second reload just ain't working, that's too damn long for a ship with worse dispersion than Roma. You heard that right, a ship having worse accuracy than Roma?! How?! Simple, Roma has 1.8 sigma and Veneto has 1.6 if I'm not mistaken. Essentially, she has traded reload and accuracy for smoke and SAP, a questionable trade off. Having used my commander with CE and Dead Eye, her accuracy...was still inconsistent, you could get good groupings more often with Dead Eye but that wouldn't stop a sudden shotgun salvo from coming out of nowhere. She does boast better secondaries than Roma though, only marginally though by having a better reload on them. There's not too much to say about Veneto, since a lot of Roma applies here, plus the differences in their guns. I'd still take Roma over Veneto though, but she's not a terrible ship, but she could be better. I'd say her sigma can be left untouched if they buff the reload, 34 seconds is just too long. In short, not bad, but not good. Nonetheless, I still enjoyed Veneto, but that may be simply because I enjoy Roma. The biggest flaw with Veneto though? It's not even the Vittorio Veneto, it's literally just Roma's model. Veneto and Littorio had significant differences in the bow shape and superstructure. Oh well, at least her perma camo makes her look drop dead sexy. Lepanto - Tier IX My time with Lepanto is the shortest of the three, but my same message still applies here, not as bad as everyone is saying she is. I believe she is a UP 41 based design, having 12 381mm guns instead of 9 406mm guns. If I had to describe this ship in one sentence, I would say an Italian Alsace with SAP and smoke, with worse gunnery than Alsace. Playing Lepanto reminded me a lot of Alsace, lots of guns, surprisingly good secondaries, very tanky. However, her reload is AWFUL, at 37 seconds, Main battery mod 3 is a must here folks, which will take it down to 32.6 seconds. Her range is still bad at 18.1km, you could take the range module but you will sacrifice reload for that. Her dispersion isn't unbearable, and even then you have 12 guns, something is bound to hit what you aimed at. Her concealment is still pretty good for a Tier 9 battleship, once again, make use of Dead Eye on these pastabotes guys. A secondary build is actually very recommended for this ship, she has a lot of guns strapped to each side and they get the job done. Her damage potential with SAP is pretty scary, if you get some good hits with this many SAP shells going down range, expect consistent 12k and higher salvos. Lepanto is a very large ship, turning circle is huge but she's fast and can still get a decent rudder shift at 13.3 seconds with the rudder module. In short, A decent Tier 9 BB, but there's room for improvement And as always, she's gorgeous, especially with the perma camo, that's kind of a trend with these ships, so at least you'll look good.. Overall... The Italian BBs aren't bad ships, but there's room for improvement, except maybe Doria, she's a solid ship in my opinion. These are unique battleships with great potential, but their faults lie in the current meta and of course, terrible reloads, range, and questionable accuracy. Other than that, I've still enjoyed these ships despite their faults and so strongly want to see them succeed as a line, WG has a good platform here, but there's room for improvement, something that can't be said about the new American BBs. Other than that, these aren't bad ships in my opinion, and I see great potential in them. A grateful thanks to all those who read
  5. Totenliste

    Possible Italian DD line

    We really need to get some Italian DDs out there to fight the French Destroyers Note: I tried to avoid using another country's unmodified destroyer in this line up. [T2] Curtatone Class DD 1923 https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_dd_curtatone.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtatone-class_destroyer Type: Destroyer Displacement: · 953 t (standard) ·1214 t (full load) Length: 84.72 m (277 ft 11 in) Beam: 8 m (26 ft 3 in) Draught: 2.46 m (8 ft 1 in) Propulsion: ·2 shaft Zoelly steam turbines ·4 Thornycroft type boilers ·22,000 hp (16,400 kW) Speed: 32 knots (59 km/h; 37 mph) Range: 1,800 nmi (3,300 km) at 15 knots (28 km/h; 17 mph) Complement: 117 Armament: ·4 × 102 mm guns (2 × 2) ·2 × 76 mm AA guns (2 × 2) ·6 × 13.2 mm machine guns ·6 × 450 mm (18 in) torpedo tubes (2 × 3) ·16 mines [T3] Quinto Sella Class DD 1929 Refit https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_dd_sella.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sella-class_destroyer Type: Destroyer Displacement: ·1140 t (standard) ·1,457 t (full load) Length: 84.9 m (278 ft 7 in) Beam: 8.6 m (28 ft 3 in) Draught: 2.7 m (8 ft 10 in) Installed power: ·3 Thornycroft boilers ·36,000 shp (27,000 kW) Propulsion: 2 shafts; 2 geared steam turbines Speed: 33 knots (61 km/h; 38 mph) Range: 3,600 nmi (6,700 km; 4,100 mi) at 14 knots (26 km/h; 16 mph) Complement: 152 Armament: ·2 × twin 120 mm (4.7 in) guns ·2 × single 40 mm (1.6 in) AA guns ·2 × single 13.2 mm (0.52 in) machine guns ·2 × twin 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes ·32 mines [T4] Turbine Class DD 1927 https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_dd_turbine.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbine-class_destroyer Type: Destroyer Displacement: ·1,220 t (standard) ·1,670 t (full load) Length: 93.2 m (305 ft 9 in) Beam: 9.2 m (30 ft 2 in) Draught: 3 m (9 ft 10 in) Installed power: ·3 Thornycroft boilers ·40,000 shp (30,000 kW) Propulsion: 2 shafts; 2 geared steam turbines Speed: 33 knots (61 km/h; 38 mph) Range: 3,200 nmi (5,900 km; 3,700 mi) at 14 knots (26 km/h; 16 mph) Complement: 179 Armament: ·2 × twin 120 mm (4.7 in) guns ·2 × single 40 mm (1.6 in) AA guns ·4 × twin 13.2 mm (0.52 in) machine guns ·2 × triple 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes ·52 mines [T5] Soldati Class DD 1941-1942 Version (also known as Camicia Nera Class) https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_dd_soldati.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soldati-class_destroyer Type: Destroyer Displacement: · 1,830 t (standard) · 2,460 t (full load) Length: ·106.7 m (350 ft 1 in) (o/a) ·101.6 m (333 ft 4 in) (pp) Beam: 10.15 m (33 ft 4 in) Draught: 3.15–4.3 m (10 ft 4 in–14 ft 1 in) Installed power: ·3 Yarrow boilers ·48,000 shp (36,000 kW) Propulsion: 2 shafts; 2 geared steam turbines Speed: 33 - 35 knots Range: 2,200 nmi at 20 knots Complement: Electronics: 206 Sonar Armament: ·(2 × 2 + 1 x 1) 120 mm (4.7 in) guns ·(4 × 2) 20 mm AA guns ·2 × triple 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes ·2 × depth charge throwers ·48 mines [T6] Navigatori Class DD 1939-1940 Refit Version (Class built in answer to French Jaguar and Guépard classes) https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_dd_navigatori.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navigatori-class_destroyer Type: Destroyer Displacement: ·2,125 t (standard) ·2,888 t (full load) Length: 109.3 m Beam: 11.2 m Draught: 4.2 m Installed power: ·4 water-tube boilers ·50,000 hp Propulsion: 2 shafts; 2 geared steam turbines Speed: 33 – 35 knots Range: 3,800 nmi (7,000 km; 4,400 mi) at 18 knots (33 km/h; 21 mph) Complement: 222–225 (wartime) Armament: ·3 × twin 120 mm (4.7 in) guns ·2 × single 40 mm (1.6 in) AA guns ·8 × twin 13.2 mm (0.52 in) machine guns ·6 × 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes (2 x 3) ·86–104 mines ·2 DCT [T7] Comandanti Medaglie d'Oro Class DD 1942 (Group 1) https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_dd_comandanti.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comandanti_Medaglie_d'Oro-class_destroyer Type: Destroyer Displacement: · 2,067 t (standard) · 2,900 t (full load) Length: 120.7 m (396 ft) (o/a) Beam: 12.3 m (40 ft 4 in) Draught: 3.6 m (11 ft 10 in) Installed power: ·3 three-drum boilers ·60,000 shp (45,000 kW) Propulsion: 2 shafts; 2 geared steam turbines Speed: 35 - 38 knots Range: 3,300 nmi (6,100 km; 3,800 mi) at 20 knots (37 km/h; 23 mph) Complement: 272 Sensors and processing systems: EC-3 ter Gufo search radar Armament: ·4 × single 135 mm (5.3 in) guns ·12 × single 37 mm (1.5 in) AA guns ·2 × triple 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes ·52 mines ·2 depth charge throwers, 64 depth charges [T8] Spalato Class DD 1943 (Italian Armament and Machinery in French based Fantasque hull) https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_dd_spalato.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yugoslav_destroyer_Split Type: Large destroyer Displacement: · 2,040 t (Standard) · 2,500 t (full load) Length: ·120 m (393 ft 8 in) (o/a) ·114.8 m (376 ft 8 in) (p/p) Beam: 11.3 m (37 ft 1 in) Draft: 3.48 m (11 ft 5 in) Installed power: ·55,000 shp (41,000 kW) ·3 × Yarrow boilers Propulsion: 2 × shafts; 2 × geared steam turbines Speed: Crew: 36 - 38 knots 214 Armament: Electronics: ·5 × single 135 mm (5.3 in) guns ·10 × single 37 mm (1.5 in) AA guns ·4 × twin 20 mm AA guns ·2 x triple 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes ·40 mines ·2 depth charge throwers ·2 DCR Sonar, Radar Note this is the completed version that Italy was unable to complete as shortly after getting it launched they scuttled it. As completed by Yugoslavia 1958. Here is a project done by Tzoli called DD Design 1939 I have a feeling this captured hull might have been something similar. Just swap out the quad racks for triples. Also check out Tzoli's other ship projects that never were, they are exceptional. https://www.deviantart.com/tzoli/art/Italian-Destroyer-Design-1939-779653886 [T9] Commandante Botti Class DD (Variant twin mount version of Comandanti Medaglie d'Oro 2nd Group) https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_dd_comandanti.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comandanti_Medaglie_d'Oro-class_destroyer Type: Destroyer Displacement: · 2,067 t (standard) · 2,900 t (full load) Length: 120.7 m (396 ft) (o/a) Beam: 12.3 m (40 ft 4 in) Draught: 3.6 m (11 ft 10 in) Installed power: ·3 three-drum boilers ·60,000 shp (45,000 kW) Propulsion: 2 shafts; 2 geared steam turbines Speed: 36 - 38 knots Range: 3,300 nmi (6,100 km; 3,800 mi) at 20 knots (37 km/h; 23 mph) Complement: 272 Sensors and processing systems: Radar Armament: ·4 × double 135 mm (5.3 in) guns ·12 × single 37 mm (1.5 in) AA guns ·2 × triple 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes ·52 mines ·2 depth charge throwers, 64 depth charges [T10] Capitani Romani Class DD/CL 1943 (Built in response to French Fantasque and Mogador classes) [Slightly modified Paolo Emilio] https://www.navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_cr_regolo.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitani_Romani-class_cruiser Type: Destroyer/Light cruiser Displacement: ·3,987 t (standard) ·5,600 t (full load) Length: 142.2 m Beam: 14.4 m Draught: 6.4 m Installed power: ·4 water-tube boilers ·110,000 shp (82,000 kW) Propulsion: 2 shafts; 2 geared steam turbines Speed: 43 knots Range: 4,350 nmi (8,060 km; 5,010 mi) at 18 knots (33 km/h; 21 mph) Complement: 494 Sensors and processing systems: Sonar, Radar Armament: ·4 × twin 135 mm (5.3 in) DP guns ·6 × single 65 mm AA guns ·4 × sextuple 20 mm (0.8 in) AA guns ·2 × quadruple 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes ·114-136 × mines ·2 DCR (24) ·2 DCT Armour: ·Turrets: 6–20 mm (0.24–0.79 in) ·Conning tower: 15 mm (0.59 in) Having had the T VI-IX (especially the IX having Emilio there is difficult) done already doesn't leave a lot of wiggle room. Notes: Curtatone: brought a number of innovations, concerning armament structure and arrangement. Curtatone class ships became the first Italian destroyers with all armament placed at center line. For the first time in Europe 102mm guns were installed in twin mounts. Besides that, these ships received triple TTs instead of twin. Soldati: Most successful and numerous class of Italian destroyers. Navigatori: Ordered in 1926 as the answer to the new French Jaguar and Guépard classes. New features of "Navigatori" type became machinery arrangement in echelon, that theoretically raised battle immunity. Transition to new 120mm/50 guns became another important innovation on account of the higher firing rate of the new guns "Navigatori" with three twin mounts not only did not yield, but also exceeded previous Leone class DDs with their four twin mounts of the old model. Comandanti Medaglie d'Oro: In one of the design stages 135mm guns took places both in single and twin mounts (my Commandante Botti Class), but in an ultimate variant the preference had been decided to go with four single mounts. Obviously my Commandante Botti Class at T9 can be tinkered to fit in at this level using twin mounts. Capitani Romani: Light cruisers of the Capitani Romani class became the answer to the new French Fantasque and Mogador classes. The ships should have, eight 135mm guns in four turrets, six of the newest 65mm AA guns and 2 quadruple TTs. The latter had original "two-level" construction (two tubes in the level and two in the upper). Because of unavailability of 65mm AA guns it was necessary to replace them with the habitual twin 37mm MGs. Now with the Paolo Emilio having 20-mm L65 Breda machine guns in sextuple mounts it forces my version to have them too. My T10 version has the following differences: Modified as designed add back the intended 65mm guns swapping out the 37mm, change out double 20mm for sextuple 20mm, and add radar/sonar option also slightly larger (difference with Paolo Emilio slightly better AA and radar/sonar option vs + 1 additional 1 x 4 TorpTube). Overall most Italian destroyers are known for instability problems at high speeds especially since they did time trials unloaded for intimidation factor of speed over the French. Most ships using their stable speed compare well to their French counterparts as well as in armament. Special Gimmick: Exhaust smoke generator as seen on Paolo Emilio. Other items up to design team of course.
  6. Kokomi_Sangonomiya

    one round in a Zara

    and surprisingly, she's a great ship
  7. Please notice the top ship for both the winners and those who did not win...(Losers) Yes my team lost..... How is it that the TOP SHIP for both teams was the much maligned and spit upon Italian Tier V Cruiser Genova?????? Don't listen to the complainers you did just fine War Gaming
  8. LL_JuneBug

    Andrea Doria A doable ship

    So while working on USS Nevada, (thanks goes out to Maxromash for base ship base models) I was referencing the other 10 gun Battle ships that are known. The 5 old Battleships of Italy. The Conte di Cavour class, and the Andrea Doria class. These were all WW1 Battleships built between 1910 nd 1916. They were all somewhat weak by WW2 standards but Italy had put quite a bit of time and money into modernizing them with modern propulsion and enlarging their main guns from 12 inch (305mm) to 12.6 inch (320mm), along with adding more aa guns and modern secondary turrets. They were sufficient to act as Battle Cruisers and should have been able to hold their own against the French Dunkerque's and the Pocket Battleships/armored cruisers of the Germans. They could outgun any British cruisers so could be used to tie up larger Battleships in the Mediterranean theater. Anyway I posted some pics of altering Giulio Caser into Andria Doria on the topic of the converted Nevada post. I got to thinking that this was probably not good as it skewed the topic over there and would make it to big and confusing. Plus some one might be interested in Nevada and not Italian ships, and or visa versa, so I started this as a new topic. A nice color line drawing showing the layout of Andrea Doria in the WW2 era. The ONI chart for her shows basic layout with out all of the small equipment onboard. This helps as some times the cluttered pics are good for information but hides basic deck detail. Roma model on bottom as seen from the top. Giulio Caser in the center, and reference image of Andrea Doria in scale with the models. A top angle view show again the difference in size between Roma and Giulio Cesar. Roma (45,000 tons) Giulio Cesar (23,000 tons) Here I am clearing the midship deck area of secondary guns and equipment to make room for the 10-90mm 90/50 Ansaldo 1938 DP guns, and the 12-135mm secondary triple turrets.
  9. Fair warning/Disclaimer: This post is rather long, but it is so for a reason. This is a very important topic and nothing about the discussion about the problems around the proposed changes can be left out without properly portraying every failure and flaw in its current situation Although Giulio Cesare was arguably too strong at tier V, (Okt Rev, Texas, and the ARP Kongo clones were about the same level as her performance wise let's be honest, especially the ARP Clones since if we're to judge things based on other ships stats of the same tier the ARP ships global average stats are practically the same.) but that isn't exactly the fault of the GC directly, think about it: what's the main thing that makes the GC tend to perform better than her contemporaries? Her accuracy. GC by far has the best accuracy of all the other battleships at her tier, and for most of the tech tree BB's at her tier their accuracy is downright atrociously bad (looking at you Texas/New York, König, and Bretange). So of course If you're more likely to actually land more shells on target, even though they're smaller, you're going to be doing more damage as a result. Again this isn't at fault of the GC for most of the other TV BB's just being mediocre at best, if anything they should be getting some tweaks to bring them more in line with the rest. But that's just a fraction of what's wrong at Tier B currently, which I'm planning to make a post on later today covering that in-depth, this is on the TVI problems so I'll get back to that. There are currently a lucritave amount of issues with her being at tier VI. So let's start off with a simple one: None of her stats have been buffed, aside from a pointless armor buff (since every cruiser and destroyer you're going to be facing can pen your bow with IFHE anyway it doesn't matter. Plus the fact that even some of your new Tier VI counterparts like the Warspite, QE, and Bayern can just lol-pen your bow anyway it again means your armor doesn't matter, which is beyond infuriating for a ship that is supposed to rely on its armor.), and a slight HP increase nothing has been done to make her even be able to be mediocre at her tier at best. Tier VIII and VI carriers will be able to strike you with impunity, Notser has even shown off how over the course of being constantly hounded by a carrier he never shot own a single attack aircraft. That's a pretty damn big problem. Then there's the fact that although her armor's been "improved" it hasn't actually made it better, let alone be enough to withstand shots at tier VI like she used to at Tier V, since this is a whole new ballpark of ships to face. Since beforehand when you fought Tier VII BB's you actually had a chance of fighting back with your armor and guns if you played your cards right. But when facing Tier VIII BB's you have zero chance of even having so little as a hope of being capable of fighting back, since your gun caliber is so low for its tier (beating out the previous Champ Dunkerque with its 330mm guns with GC's 320mm guns), imcombination of its short range for its tier now (that even most cruisers at tier VI can outrage her now, let alone higher tier ones,) with the addition of the fact that your armor doesn't stand up like it used to against your highest tier possible opponents, as literally every single tier VIII BB will be able to just rip you apart no matter how you angle, as they all overmatch your bow, allowing them to do massive damage to you while you won't be able to do even moderate damage in return unless they're presenting practically a perfect broadside. Which isn't something that can be corrected to no longer make it the case without completely overhauling every other Tier VI BB, and at that point it'd make more sense to just leave her at tier V. Then there's the issue that the reload is now appalling given its new tier placement, given how ships like Dunkerque with its 2x4 330mm guns has a full 4 second faster reload, that's with 4 guns packed into two turrets and being 10mm larger yet still reloading faster than the GC. Then there's the Fuso: she has 6x2 356mm guns that reload in 28 seconds, while the GC has two less guns, again of a lower caliber, that still bafflingly manage to reload a full 2 seconds slower. Then there's the problem of her now having Tier VI MM, which not only is a far more aggressive MM tier than Tier V as you're far more likely to be bottom tier at tier VI than Tier V. Then there's the issue with that MM not being what those who bought the Giulio Cesare bought into: they bought a Tier V battleship because they wanted to play a battleship at tier V with that specific MM, if they wanted to play a BB at tier VI with tier VI MM they would have bought something else like the Warspite or Dunkerque. Which that same new MM placement also completely ruins the enjoyability of the ship due to you now running into so many tier VIII ships that are entirely designed around killing BB's: the Asashio (which I detest that monstrosity), the Akizuiki/HSF harakazae (with the Akizuiki gun turret hull) due to their ludicrous fire rates and being able to IFHE the entirety of the GC at tier VI, every single tier VI and VIII carrier (they can maul you but good luck shooting down a single plane), and again every Tier VIII BB can just lol-pen your bow and Godspeed trying to do anything to them in return unless they're broadside and even then you'll barely do any substantial damage to them. So unless you can make it not face Tier VIII's it will never be a comfortable fit at that tier like it was at Tier VI. Since it can't stand a chance of holding its ground like it could bottom tier at tier V like it would have to now at tier VI. Not to mention there's no role or job the Cesare can currently fill that another battleship doesn't do it massively better than the GC, which leads to there being no point to ever own or play her, as there's just a better ship for every role that does that job but better than the GC in its current state. Warspite does the accuracy and devastating salvo job better thanks to its 2.1 Sigma and 15" guns, that hit more often and hit harder Arizona also fills that same Accurate BB sniper role better as it is Dunkerque fills the same fast flanker role, but with a much faster reload, it is actually faster, and has all its guns in the front P E F already claims the Secondary/Brawler spot  The West V 1941 has better damage potential by far with the same reload speed.  There's just nothing it can do that any other Tier VI already does but better And this is without bringing up the issues of invalidating prior business agreements by changing a product in this manner after it was sold under the assertion that it would never be changed, nerfed, or made worse farther down the line. (Which wouldn't that technically be an invalidation of their previous EULA/TOS promises during the time it was being sold? As wasn't it advertised that it would never be tampered with later down the line?). That's not even mentioning the legal repercussions an action like this could entail, and am legitimately and rather unfortunately finding myself considering if they don't handle this properly. And finally to the argument of "Premium ships ahould be able to have their stats nerfed or made worse after their sold" I have this to say: alright, I'll take that moving forward from here on out only, but you still can't change those that have been already sold, as they were sold with the promise and contract that they wouldn't be changed or modified later down the line. As that's where I draw the line. Which is another reason every fiber of my being is against this change. In conclusion: what exactly am I wanting to happen? WG to cancel the move to teir VI and instead roll-back the buffs given to the GC over the period of time that she's been on sale, that way she's able to be toned down a notch, without it no longer being what people purchased to begin with. The buffs to her were unnecessary and were done after she was for sale, and would be enough of a change to make her no longer OP to the degree she's at; making the ones for the change happy as she's no longer as strong, and those that own her happy as they keep her at tier V, and not have her trashed by having to fight as a tier VI.
  10. Some first-hand accounts of WW2 by actual Italian Soldiers, I apologize but as their native Italian speakers the Audio is in Italian but there are English Subtitles already incorporated into the video. "Italian and American WWII veterans meet again on the mountains where they fought against each other. Part of the "On the Gothic Line" documentary.": "Corporal Colombo's company did not see frontline action, yet, in spite all the attempts to defuse tension, the situation in the rear was far from peaceful. And when the war was over and the San Marco Marines had laid down their arms, hundreds of them were seized by the partisans and shot dead in cold blood." "On January 17, 1943 at 17:30h, Ugo Balzari - ski messenger of the Tridentina Alpini Division - and the rest of the Italian 8th Army in Russia receives the order to leave the Don River Line and pull back. The Red Army has broken through the Axis lines down South, near Stalingrad. Temperatures as low as -40° and 11 Russian encirclement lines are now awaiting them. They will have to fight through all of them if they want to survive.": "After hundreds of miles on foot in the grip of the Russian winter, Ugo Balzari and what remains of the Italian 8th Army finally reach the last encirclement line at Nikolayevka. The 11th and final battle awaits them. Only 9,000 men are battle worthy, the remaining 30,000 are either wounded, frostbitten or shell-shocked. The long line of stragglers includes Germans, Hungarians, and Romanians. Men of the 40th Russian Army are waiting for them well entrenched in the village behind the railway line. Gen. Reverberi climbs up the self-propelled gun and famously shouts: “ Tridentina , forward!”" : "At the beginning of December 1941 Enzo Giordano's 6th assault company, 2nd Bn, GGFF Regiment, was deployed at the Bir el Gobi outpost. At that time Rommel was still trying to capture Tobrouk. Little he knew that General Norrie's Army Corps was heading towards him from the South in order to encircle his forces. Had Norrie succeeded, it would have been the end of the Africa Korps. Between the British VIII Army Corps and Rommel there were only these 2 battalions of the Italian GGFF Regiment. Taking them out must have looked like a walk in the park. What followed instead was the 2nd Battle of Bir el Gobi, one of the most surprising feat of arms of WWII in Africa.": "Historians often refer to Rommel's retreat in North Africa as a tactical masterpiece. Rarely do they mention that it has only been possible thanks to the fierce fight put up by Italian troops covering the Axis retreat. From El Alamein to Tunisia the men led by General Messe always held their positions against superior forces for an impossibly long time. Among them was 18 year old Enzo Giordano of the 2nd BN of the Italian GGFF Regiment. At Enfidaville the Regiment made its last stand as they kept their positions and even recaptured those lost by the Germans. The regiment kept fighting even when all German forces had surrendered. The GGFF were the last Axis unit to lay down their arms in North Africa.": "Marò Scelto (Corporal) Giovanni Tempra of the Italian Decima Mas Division talks about his close-range combat experience on the Senio River banks against units of the 8th British Army in early 1945. " "Towards the end of WW2, France wanted to payback Italy for its aggression in 1940, and started a series of actions on the border. When the French took Mt Chenaillet, a strategic outpost, from the Germans, Alpino Salvatore Daviddi, Tirano BN of the Monterosa division, volunteered to go take it back.": "In November 1944, Alpino Daviddi volunteered to capture Mt. Chenaillet, a strategic Alpine outpost in French territory. On the 21st the height was taken and he became part of the garrison in charge of defending it. He did not have to wait long for the French counterattack.": "Early in 1944, the Allies land at Anzio. Simultaneously they are also pushing from the South at Cassino where the Germans ask the Italian Decima Mas Divison for help. Egidio Cateni, 1st company of the Barbarigo Battalion and his anti-tank platoon is sent to replace a German SS unit that was in trouble. Since the Allies have more tanks than drivers, the order is to shoot to kill. Cateni in a few days claims the destruction of several Allied tanks. But it wasn't a pretty sight.": "In May 1944, Marò Antonio Crosio could not wait to join the bulk of the Barbarigo Battalion who were desperately trying to stop the Allied forces at Anzio and Nettuno. But by the time he reached his foxhole, the Allies were making progress on the Gustav Line behind them. One month later the Axis forces had to pull back from the Nettuno front to avoid encirclement. Rome was about fall. The Battalion had lost almost half of his men and what happened next, brought Crosio's service to an abrupt end.": "In April 1945 "Ardito" Domenico Lombini and his Fireteam of the "1 Battaglione d'Assalto Forlì", deployed North of the High Senio River, has to fight hard to defend his position in order to cover the retreat of Axis units pressed by the advancing Allies." "In the summer of 1944, 63 BN's artillery guns of the Legione Tagliamento were sent to the Southern Italian Front Line to face the advancing tanks of the British 8th Army. But when their 38/42 cannons got replaced with 81mm mortars, artilleryman Ernesto Trentini realized a different and uglier task was awaiting him.": "Following the September 1943 Italian Army breakdown, private Girelli was called to serve in the newly formed Italian Social Republic. As he did not care much about Fascist units, he decided to join the non-political corps of the Bersaglieri. His unit was deployed at the Italian/French border with the task of preventing the Allies from entering the country from there. In spite of the stalemate situation there, from time to time there was some shell fire exchange aimed at disrupting logistics. Little Girelli knew that after the war he would meet a fellow countryman who had been at the receiving end of his shelling..." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Pb8QS8hJJ4 "On April 27 1945, Lt Capecci of the Monterosa Division is trying to take his men back home when he realizes that Shermans of the 5th US army are in hot pursuit. He orders his men to stop, turn their anti-tank cannon around and open fire.": "On Dec 26th 1944, Massimo Zamorani - Bersagliere of the Italian "Mameli" Storm BN - was sent with his platoon to free a German unit that had been surrounded.": "On Jan 17th 1945, Gian Ugo Taggiasco - Sgt of the Italian Alpine Division "Monterosa" - was sent to an advanced outpost in Tuscany's Serchio Valley. In the morning he found out that his position had been surrounded by a 100 man strong US Buffalo Div. patrol.": "Artillery LT Cesare Fiaschi of the Italian Monterosa Alpine Division, takes us through his memories of Operation Winter Storm. one of the Axis' last counter-attacks in WW2.": "On a cold December night of 1944 Helmsman Aurelio Cosatto and his crew set out on a mission. Together with 2 other MAS's (Assault Surface Vehicles) and a few smaller assault vehicles, they had to intercept an Allied supply convoy headed for Nice in the South of France. But when a silhouette finally appeared in the darkness, they quickly realized they were about to take on a tougher nut to crack.": "Lt Aladar Kummer takes us through his last commando mission beyond the Allied lines in WWII Italy." https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/162786-carlo-fecia-di-cossato/ Macchi C.202 Folgore "The Macchi C.202 Folgore (Italian "thunderbolt") was an Italian fighter aircraft developed and manufactured by Macchi Aeronautica. It was operated mainly by the Regia Aeronautica (RA; Royal (Italian) Air Force) in and around the Second World War. According to aviation author David Mondey, the Folgore has been considered to be one of the best wartime fighters to serve in large numbers with the Regia Aeronautica. The C.202 was designed by a team headed by the company's chief of design, Italian aeronautics engineer Mario Castoldi. As per company tradition, Macchi aircraft designed by Mario Castoldi received the "C" letter in their model designation, hence the Folgore is commonly referred to as the C.202 or MC.202. The C.202 was a development of the earlier C.200 Saetta, powered by an Italian-built version of the German Daimler-Benz DB 601Aa engine and featuring a redesigned fuselage for greater streamlining. During July 1941, the Folgore went into service with the Regia Aeronautica. In combat, it very quickly proved itself to be an effective and deadly dogfighter against its contemporaries. During its service life, the C.202 was deployed on all fronts in which Italy was involved. During late 1941, it commenced offensive operations over Malta and in North Africa, where Italian and German forces were engaged in heavy combat against British and later American operations. The C.202 continued to be used in North Africa as late as mid-1943, by which point the type was withdrawn to support defensive efforts in Sicily and the Italian mainland following their invasion by Allied forces. It also saw limited use on the Eastern Front. Following the 1943 Armistice with Italy, the type was mostly used as a trainer aircraft. The type was also operated by Croatia. The Australian ace Clive Caldwell, who fought a wide variety of German, Italian and Japanese fighters during 1941–45, later stated that the C.202 was "one of the best and most undervalued of fighters". The C.202 also had its defects: like its predecessor, the C.200, it could enter a dangerous spin. The radios were unreliable, routinely forcing pilots to communicate by waggling their wings and Western historians regard the C.202 as insufficiently armed, being furnished with just a pair of machine guns that had a tendency for jamming. Still in mid-Summer 1942, in North Africa, the Folgore achieved a ratio kill/loss better than that of the Messerschmitt Bf 109s." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macchi_C.202 Macchi C.205 Veltro "The Macchi C.205 (also known as MC.205, "MC" standing for "Macchi Castoldi") Veltro (Italian: Greyhound) was an Italian World War II fighter aircraft built by the Aeronautica Macchi. Along with the Reggiane Re.2005 and Fiat G.55, the Macchi C.205 was one of the three "Serie 5" Italian fighters built around the powerful Daimler-Benz DB 605 engine. The C.205 was a development of the earlier C.202 Folgore. With a top speed of some 640 km/h (400 mph) and equipped with a pair of 20 mm cannon as well as 12.7 mm Breda machine guns, the Macchi C.205 Veltro was highly respected by Allied and Axis pilots alike. Widely regarded as one of the best Italian aircraft of World War II, in action it proved to be extremely effective, destroying a large number of Allied bombers and capable of successfully clashing on equal terms with fighters such as the North American P-51D Mustang, a capability which encouraged the Luftwaffe to use a number of these aircraft to equip one Gruppe. However, while the C.205 was able to match the best Allied opponents in speed and maneuverability, it was introduced late in the conflict. Moreover, due to the poor Italian industrial capacity of the time, only a small production run was delivered before the end of the war. Like the Spitfire, the Veltro was tricky in its construction and thus slow to build. Italy's highest scoring ace, Adriano Visconti, achieved 11 of his 26 credited victories in the few weeks he was able to fly the Veltro, with the top scoring Sergente Maggiore pilota Luigi Gorrini shooting down 14 enemy aircraft plus six damaged with the C.205." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macchi_C.205 Fiat G.55 Centauro "The Fiat G.55 Centauro (Italian: "Centaur") was a single-engine single-seat World War II fighter aircraft used by the Regia Aeronautica and the A.N.R. (Aeronautica Nazionale Repubblicana, the Airforce of the Northern half of Italy that continued to fight for the Axis after the Armistice, refusing to accept such a humiliating surrender they fought until the war's end.) in 1943–1945. It was designed and built in Turin by Fiat. The Fiat G.55 was arguably the best type produced in Italy during World War II, (a subjective claim also frequently made for the Macchi C.205 Veltro as well as for the Reggiane Re.2005 Sagittario) but it did not enter production until 1943, when, after comparative tests against the Messerschmitt Bf 109G and the Focke-Wulf 190, the Luftwaffe itself regarded the Fiat G.55 as "the best Axis fighter". During its short operational service, mostly under the Repubblica Sociale Italiana insignia, after the 8 September 1943 armistice, this powerful, robust and fast aircraft proved itself to be an excellent interceptor at high altitude. In 1944, over Northern Italy, the Centauro clashed with British Supermarine Spitfire, P-51 Mustang, P-47 Thunderbolt and P-38 Lightning, proving to be no easy adversary. Italian fighter pilots liked their Centauro but by the time the war ended, fewer than 300 had been built.[3] By comparison, the Germans produced 35,000 Bf 109s." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_G.55 Why the M38 Carcano Fucile Corto is one of the best thought-out rifles for WWII To quote the Video Description: "I would like to propose that the M38 Carcano short rifle was, despite the poor reputation of the Carcano series of rifles, one of the best thought out bolt action weapons of World War 2. Why, you ask? Well, let's consider... Only a few nations actually recognized the short ranges at which combat actually took place. Germany was one, as seen with it's 8x33mm cartridge development, and Italy was another. The sights on the M38 series of carbines were made as simple fixed notches, with no adjustments to be knocked out of place unintentionally. With a 200 meter zero (or 150 meters, with the Finnish replacement front sight), the weapon needed no adjustment to make hits out to 300 meters, which is as far as anyone could realistically engage a target. The M38 is a light and handy weapon compared to its contemporaries - 8.1 pounds and 40.2 inches (3.7kg and 1.02m) - and it fired a significantly lighter cartridge as well. The 7.35x51mm round used a 128gr (8.3g) bullet at 2400-2500 fps (735-755 m/s) depending on barrel length. This produced noticeably less recoil than rounds like the .30-06 or 8mm Mauser, which made it easier for troops to shoot effectively. The Carcano also had a 6-round capacity and fed with Mannlicher type clips, which are potentially faster to load than Mauser-type stripper clips. Today we will discuss the M38 and these features (along with its predecessor, the M91 rifle) as they appear on paper. At the same time, over on InRangeTV, today we have the first stage of a 2-Gun Action Challenge Match in which I am shooting this M38 Carcano against Karl, who is using a Mauser K98k - so we will see how the theory works out in the field!" The Beretta 38A "The Beretta 38A is not a gun that comes to mind for many people today when discussing World War Two submachine guns, but at the time it was one of the most desirable guns of its type. So - does it live up to that reputation?" As for tanks the Italians are continuously and unjustly treated as a laughing stock by modern historians, yet they seemingly lack understanding of why such designs were used; As Italy at the outbreak of the war lacked the Manufacturing capabilities to produce a "Jack-Of-All-Trades" tank like the American M4 Sherman. As such Italy had a dilemma on it's hands; It needed armored vehicles that could fulfill a multitude of different Roles, but lacked an industry to develop a tank that could do all of them. As such Italy opt'ed to set about developing a multitude of smaller vehicles that would each fulfill a very specific role, and only to be designed with that role in mind. Which in turn led to a drastically different Tank Warfare Doctrine, which leads to confusion for those trying to look at their actions through the lens of the Doctrines of the US, UK, Germany etc. In that for Italy Tankettes like the CV.33 were never designed nor intended to engage in Tank v Tank combat, instead, they were designed to be used as an Infantry support vehicle, a Reconnaissance Vehicle, and could be easily modified to function as a tow vehicle to move larger Italian 90mm Anti-Air/Anti-Tank batteries. Thusly Light tanks were designed with the belief via their doctrine that Light Tanks are solely for Reconassaince and light infantry support, and under-no controllable circumstances were they supposed to engage enemy Armor. Medium tanks were designed for the task of giving infantry support in more heavily defended areas such as trenches or fortifications and were designed with a caliber of gun (as in the M15/42) that could realiably take out any tank it would encounter in the areas it would be engaging (the Cruiser series of tanks, and the Crusaders), and were to be accompanied by an Infantry Anti-Tank division (for example the Folgore) who would be tasked with taking out tanks like M4 Shermans and Matildas, which time and time again they did so bravely, and effectively. To give you a visual idea of how the Italian Infantry Anti-Tank style divisions would go about doing so here's a clip from an old WW2 movie that shows the Folgore (a division worthy of praise and more recognition today), and should give a relative understanding of what it was like, even though some of the vehicles in the clip weren't actually used in WW2 at the time, due to it being an older film its somewhat understandable. British General Hughes of the 44th Infantry Division: "I wish to say that in all my life I have never encountered soldiers like those of the Folgore." According to American historian John W.Gordon, whose book Behind Rommel's Lines was recently translated into Italian, the British special forces were so impressed by the methods and tactics of the Italian desert corps that they actually copied them. Italy's crack paratrooper regiment, the "Folgore", sent some 5,000 of its men to El Alamein. Only 304 returned. ''The paratroopers threw themselves against oncoming tanks with Molotov cocktails and live mines,'' said Francesco Marini Dettina, a survivor of the battle who was awarded a silver medal for valor. Interviewed for a documentary, Dettina said: ''They urged us to surrender but the only answer they got came from the artillery with our last remaining shells. The British were surprised by the Italians' behavior.'' Churchill said in a speech to the House of Commons a month after El Alamein: ''We must honor the men that were the Lions of the Folgore''. As for Tank Destroyers, the Philosophy was rather simple: They were designed to deal with anything the rest of their armor couldn't deal with. And at that, they excelled! Not to mention Germany were quite fond of the Italian Tank Destroyers, using them extensively in their own ranks in the Deserts of Africa. As for a while, until they got their hands on the Italian Semovente da 75/18, besides Flak 8,8 and Italian 90mm gun emplacements, the Axis didn't have anything that could effectively take out tanks like the Matildas. The Semovente da 75/18 ( Sturmgeschütz M42 mit 75/18 850 (i) in German use ) "The Semovente da 75/18 was an Italian self-propelled gun of the Second World War. It was built by mounting the 75 mm Obice da 75/18 modello 34 mountain gun on the chassis of a M13/40, M14/41 or M15/42 tank. The first 60 were built using the M13/40 chassis and a subsequent 162 were built on the M14/41 chassis from 1941 to 1943, when the M15/43 chassis were introduced. The Semovente da 75/18 was intended to be an interim vehicle until the heavier P40 tank could be available." "Although these machines were not widely known, the vehicle performed well in its role. Though it was technically similar to the StuG III, it had a totally different role, serving as divisional artillery instead of a pure assault gun. The organic structure consisted of two artillery groups for every armored division, with two batteries each (four 75/18 each and a command vehicle). The total was of 18 75 mm L/18 (included two in reserve) and 9 command vehicles, which were characterized by additional radio equipment and a Breda 13.2 mm heavy machine gun mounted instead of the main gun. The number originally ordered, 60 total, was enough for the three armored divisions." "The Semovente da 75/18s were deployed in the North African campaign and during the Allied invasion of Sicily, alongside M tank units to provide additional firepower. Despite the fact that they were not designed to fight other tanks, their 75 mm howitzer proved ideal (thanks to its low muzzle velocity) for firing HEAT shells; its 5.2 kg HEAT shell ("Effetto Pronto" in Italian) could pierce 80 mm of armour at 500 meters, and could thus defeat tanks such as the US built M3 Grant and M4 Sherman used by the British Army. As such, these machines were responsible for many of the successes by the Italian armoured troops during 1942–43, when the medium tanks (all armed with a 47 mm gun) were no longer effective. On another account, the Semovente da 75/18 on M14 chassis allowed the Ariete and the Littorio division a somewhat wider tactical repertoire until British deployment of U.S. medium tanks negated that small advantage." "The most successful action fought by Semovente da 75/18 took place on 10 June 1942, south of Knightsbridge, during the Battle of Gazala. Thirty M3 Grant and ten M3 Stuart of 1st and 6th Royal Tank Regiment attacked a position held by the Ariete division but were repelled by Semovente da 75/18s as well as some M13/40s and gun trucks, losing three Grants and two Stuarts from 6th Royal Tank Regiment and twelve Grants and three Stuarts from 1st Royal Tank Regiment. The Italians lost two M13/40s." "Despite its limitations (namely its cramped interior and the insufficiently powerful engine in the M40 and M41 variants), the Semovente da 75/18 proved successful both in the direct support role and in anti-tank fighting; its main advantages, other than their sheer firepower, was in its thicker armor (relative to the medium tanks) and lower silhouette that made it more difficult to hit. Due to these features, the Semovente da 75/18 has been regarded as one of the few Italian armored fighting vehicles to be seriously feared by Allied tank crews, and despite the fact that it was originally conceived for a totally different role, the 75/18 often ended up replacing the standard M13/40." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semovente_da_75/18 Semovente da 90/53 "The Semovente da 90/53 was primarily developed in response to demands by Italian forces on the Eastern Front for a vehicle-mounted anti-tank weapon that could take on Soviet T-34 and KV tanks. Italian armored forces on the Eastern Front were equipped only with the L6/40 tank and Semovente 47/32 self-propelled gun; neither of these had the firepower to cope with the Soviet medium and heavy tanks. However, no Semoventi da 90/53 was ever sent to the Eastern Front." "The major drawback of the Semovente da 90/53, as with many self-propelled gun types of World War II, was the open top and rear of the gun compartment, which left the gun crew exposed to shrapnel and small arms fire. In addition, the Semovente da 90/53 had little or no armor in most areas. Because these vehicles were designed to operate far enough away from enemy vehicles to not be subject to incoming fire, this was initially not considered a problem. The small ammunition capacity of the vehicle—six rounds—was also a problem, necessitating the creation of special ammunition carriers out of Fiat L6/40 tanks, one accompanying each Semovente da 90/53 in the field. The L6 ammunition carrier carried 26 rounds, plus an additional 40 rounds in a towed trailer. It fired Effetto Pronto, or HEAT rounds, which could pierce 200mm armor plating at a range of 2,200 meters." "In the North African Campaign, the Semovente da 90/53 proved to be an effective weapon and its long-range was well suited to the flat and open desert terrain. 24 Semovente 90/53s saw service against the Allies in the 10° Raggruppamento Semoventi, which was stationed in Sicily during the Allied invasion in 1943. Following the Armistice of Cassibile in September 1943, the few surviving Semoventi da 90/53 were seized by the German Army, but were of little value in the mountainous terrain of Northern Italy where they operated. As a result, most finished their careers as long-range artillery." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semovente_da_90/53 Semovente da 75/34 "The Semovente da 75/34 was an Italian self-propelled gun developed and used during World War II. It was a 75 mm L/34 gun mounted on a M15/42 tank chassis. It saw action during the defense of Rome in 1943 and later served with the Germans in Northern Italy and the Balkans. 141 were produced during the war (60 before the Armistice of Cassibile in September 1943, 81 later under German control)." "While derived from the earlier Semovente, it differed somewhat from it; instead of two conjoined plates each 21 millimeters (0.83 in) thick, the frontal armor was made of a single 42 millimeters (1.7 in) thick plate and the casemate was modified to fit the longer gun. It had the same 192 HP petrol engine of the M15/42 which allowed for a reasonable top speed of 38.4 kilometers per hour (23.9 mph)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semovente_da_75/34 Semovente da 105/25 or StuG M43 mit 105/25 853 (i) ^^German Semovente da 105/28 and Semovente Da 75/34 with name Heidi 3 from 71 Inf.Div. "The development of a self-propelled gun with high firepower was initiated during 1942 in parallel by Odera-Terni-Orlando (OTO) and Ansaldo. OTO proposed the installation of a 105/25 gun on the hull of a P26/40 tank. Ansaldo, for its part, proposed to use the hull of the Semovente M42 already in production and was, therefore, able to present, on 28 February 1943, its prototype to the Centro Studi Della Motorizzazione while the OTO model was still in development. The production of the Ansaldo proposal was therefore approved by the Royal Italian Army. In the final version, with an improved hull and the 105/25 gun, it was adopted on April 2, 1943, as the self-propelled M43 105/25, Bassotto ("Dachshund"). Twelve units were built and used in 1943 by the 135ª Armored Division "Ariete II", which clashed with German troops near Rome in the days following the armistice of Cassibile that went into effect on 8 and 9 September 1943. They acquitted themselves well in combat. Following the Italian surrender, the Germans, who regarded the Semovente 105/25 "Bassotto" as a very good vehicle, captured them and built an additional 91 units, renamed StuG M43 mit 105/25 853 (i) and used them against the Anglo-American forces." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semovente_da_105/25 Semovente da 75/46 or Sturmgeschütz M 43 mit 75/46 (852) (i) "After the armistice of Cassibile signed in September 1943, Northern and Central Italy fell under German control. In 1944 the progress of the war led them to order a new Italian armoured vehicle for a tank-fighting role, based on the Semovente da 105/25 self-propelled gun. The result was the Semovente da 75/46, which was renamed Sturmgeschütz M 43 mit 75/46 (852) (i) by the Germans, following their naming convention. The 75/46 shared the same "M 43" hull of the 105/25. However, the 105 mm L25 howitzer was replaced by a longer 75 mm L46 cannon – originally conceived as a FlaK cannon but also used as an anti-tank gun – which ensured a higher muzzle velocity (750 m/s instead of 510) and a far greater effective range, being able to fire a 6.5 kg (14 lb 5 oz) shell up to 13,000 m (43,000 ft) away. This gun could be loaded with HE or AP rounds; when loaded with the latter, it could pierce up to 90 mm (3.5 in) of armour from 500 m. The other main difference with its precursor was in the overall increased armour: sloped plates were applied to the casemate and others were added on the sides, above the tracks. Due to these features and despite its origins, the 75/46 is considered a tank destroyer in every respect." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semovente_da_75/46 Semovente da 149/40 This vehicle was literally just the Italian "Cannone da 149/40 modello 35" field artillery gun placed onto a modified Carro Armato M15/42 tank chassis. Didn't really do much of anything but I found the design interesting enough to include. Now onto a big screw-up on wargaming's end when it comes to Roma in-game: (Commentor Nathan Stahlwirth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9YS3GcycNQ) "When it comes to the Roma and Littorio class, There is one major misconception that really should be clarified, and that is the cause of the problems with main battery dispersion for this class. After the war, remaining ammunition for the Ansaldo 1934, the 381mm gun used on the Littorio and Veneto (Roma's guns were made by OTO/Terni) was inspected for compliance with design specifications on mass, dimensions, and assembly. It was discovered that the overwhelming majority of the ammunition did not pass this inspection in one manner or another, with most of the problems being found in the condition of the critical driving bands on the shells. This reality was glaringly demonstrated in the contrast between the shooting manifested by the Littorio/Italia, vs. that of the Vittorio Veneto. Littorio/Italia demonstrated that its grouping was accurate enough, and tight enough to cause splinter damage to RN DDs during the first "battle" of Sirte Gulf (17 December, 1941 - I don't consider it much of a battle, since the action lasted under 7 minutes), starting from a range of 35,000 yards (Source; Robert O. Dulin & William H. Garzke: Battleships Axis and Neutral Battleships of WWII, page 397). What is even more telling about the main gun accuracy, and the exceptional fire control of the Vittorio Veneto class, was that range was determined, main battery was trained, and accurate salvos delivered repeatedly against fast-moving destroyers, in under 7 minutes, with only a single turret firing, with shell flight time being roughly 65 seconds. The splintering was not a single, lucky shell, but rather, was repeated in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th salvos fired, prompting the enemy to lay down a smokescreen for protection from further damage - from a ship that was over 35,000 yards (about 20 miles) away. Keep in mind that during Bismarck's last battle, Rodney, closing from 22,000 yards, required over 10 minutes for her gunlayer to get his first straddle on Bismarck ( a huge target compared to the DDs Littorio fired at, moving at only 8 knots, not 30+). Littorio doubtlessly had properly fabricated ammunition, but Vittorio Veneto suffered from wildly misplaced groups during her Guado encounter (28 March 1941), and at 24,000 yards only scored one near miss (splinters) against RN cruisers, during 25 minutes of firing. It should be fairly obvious that, had the gun been that fundamentally defective, the ships would never have been allowed to go into service with such a glaring defect in place, especially since the gun was first designed and tested in 1934 (hence the name; "Ansaldo Model 1934"), while the first two ships were fully operational by 1940. A far more likely scenario, supported by empirical evidence and assay, is one in which Italian industry, for whatever reason, was not fabricating projectiles of consistent, and proper quality, for the M1934, and other naval rifles. Had this problem been unique to the 381mm gun, there might have been a basis for the position that the guns were to blame for the dispersion; however, given that the problem was erratic, unpredictable, and happening on other Italian ships at the same time, it's possible that the increased demands and pressures of a wartime economy may have been cause for a breakdown of the serialized production of ordnance in Italy, and lead to some units leaving the factory in less than perfect working condition." Not to mention how incorrect the layout of her Ingame armor scheme is when compared to what it was historically, and actually should be Ingame. As this has continually Irritated me as the historical placement of her armor would (Imho) make her a much more sturdy and resilient battleship. And not so prone to getting half her HP chunked off in a moments notice, and that's if your lucky and dont get just flat-out deleted.
  11. TheDgamesD

    Dasha Captains

    No Italian/Regia Marina Dasha? I'm not mad wargaming, just disappointed and sad. Especially since there's bound to be a line for them eventually, same (possibly) for the Commonwealth. Sure its only premium ships currently but that doesn't mean you couldn't've released one anyway, The Italian Navy is not only my favorite from WW2 from a historical standpoint, but also based on designs/looks. As such it deeply saddens me I wont have a Italian Dasha captain to use on them
  12. TheDgamesD

    Battle of Espero Convoy

    The Battle of the Espero Convoy (Battaglia del convoglio Espero) on 28 June 1940, was the first surface engagement between Italian and Allied warships of the Second World War. Three modern 36 kn (41 mph; 67 km/h) Italian destroyers made a run from Taranto for Tobruk in Libya to transport Blackshirt (Milizia Volontaria per la Sicurezza Nazionale) anti-tank units, in case of a British tank attack from Egypt. By coincidence, the Mediterranean Fleet was at sea to conduct a destroyer anti-submarine sweep around Crete and provide cover for three Allied convoys to Egypt, one from Turkey and two from Malta. British aircraft from Malta spotted the Italian destroyers and the 7th Cruiser Squadron turned to intercept them and a running fight took place south-west of Crete, in which the destroyers were impeded by their cargoes and an adverse sea. The Italian destroyer Espero (Capitano di Vascello Enrico Baroni) was sunk while covering the escape of Zeffiro and Ostro to Benghazi; 53 of the 225 crew and passengers were rescued, three of whom died of their wounds. The British and Australian cruisers expended a huge amount of ammunition and the Malta convoys had to be postponed until they had replenished from the 800 6-inch shells in reserve. Convoy AS 1 from Turkey arrived safely by 3 July. On 10 June 1940, Italy declared war on Britain and France. Comando Supremo (Italian Supreme Command of the armed forces) expected a British advance into Cyrenaica (eastern Libya) led by armored forces. An anti-tank unit comprising 162 gunners, ten anti-tank guns and 120 short tons (110 t) of ammunition was ordered to Tobruk by a fast destroyer convoy. On 27 June, five destroyers were to sail from Alexandria on an anti-submarine sweep near the Ionian island of Kythira and them sail on to Malta to form the close escort for convoys MF 1 and MS 2 to Alexandria. Intelligence about Italian submarines led to the sweep being diverted through the Kasos Strait east of Crete, then north of the island, thence past Kythira to Malta. Short Sunderland flying boats of 201 Group RAF, based in Malta, were to co-operate with the naval operations in the Ionian Sea. On the Italian declaration of war, the passenger liner El Nil, en route for Egypt from Marseilles, Knight of Malta and interned Italian ship Rodi were in Malta and in Operation MA 3 these ships formed the fast convoy MF 1 [13 kn (15 mph; 24 km/h)]. Five slower ships, Zeeland, Kirkland, Masirah, Novasli and Tweed carrying naval stores for Alexandria, formed the slow convoy MS 1 [9 kn (10 mph; 17 km/h)] were to depart from Malta for Alexandria. MF 1 carried civilians being evacuated from Malta and all of the Mediterranean Fleet was to sortie to protect them in Operation MA 5. Convoy AS1, with seven ships, was to sail from the Dardanelles to Egypt, with four ships joining from Salonika, Piraeus and Smyrna (İzmir), escorted by the light cruisers HMS Capetown and Caledon of the 3rd Cruiser Squadron and the destroyers HMS Garland, Nubian, Mohawk and Vampire, due to depart from Cape Helles early on 28 June. The timing of the departures was arranged so that on 30 June the three convoys would be at Position K (35°N, 22°E), south of Cape Matapan, about halfway between Malta and Alexandria. Five cruisers of the 7th Cruiser Squadron (also known as Force C, Vice-Admiral John Tovey) with the 1st Cruiser Division, the Leander class cruisers (eight 6-inch guns) HMS Orion (flagship), Neptune, HMAS Sydney and the 2nd Cruiser Division, the Town (Gloucester) class cruisers (twelve 6-inch guns) Liverpool and Gloucester, were to sail west of Crete near Position K. The 1st Battle Squadron (Rear-Admiral Henry Pridham-Wippell) with HMS Royal Sovereign Ramillies, the aircraft carrier HMS Eagle and the 2nd Destroyer Flotilla, were to be south-west of Crete also near Position K, ready to intervene according to circumstances. At 6:00 p.m. on 26 June, Caledon, Garland and Vampire sailed from Alexandria to rendezvous with Capetown, Nubian and Mohawk the next day while heading for the Dardanelles. A dawn on 27 June, five ships of the 2nd Destroyer Flotilla departed Alexandria and at 11:00 a.m., the 7th Cruiser Squadron left for Position K. The Italians chose the Turbine-class destroyers Espero (flagship, Capitano di Vascello Enrico Baroni), Zeffiro and Ostro to transport the anti-tank units, for their high speed [36 kn (41 mph; 67 km/h)] and loading capacity. Two smaller First World War era escort vessels, Pilo and Giuseppe Missori, which carried 52 troops and additional supplies, departed independently for Tobruk some hours later. As the sun set, the 2nd Destroyer Flotilla of Voyager, Dainty, Decoy, Defender and Ilex were 200 nmi (230 mi; 370 km) north of Alexandria. At 6:28 p.m. while 100 nmi (115 mi; 185 km) south-east of Crete, the flotilla spotted a submarine, Console Generale Liuzzi, which quickly dived. Four of the destroyers made depth-charge attacks and after the fifth an oil slick was seen and trailed by Dainty. The submarine had been badly damaged by the depth charging and was eventually forced to the surface. After a hunt of ninety minutes the submarine was seen again at 2,500 yd (2,300 m) and two destroyers fired on the submarines until a white light was taken to indicate a surrender. Dainty moved closer and began to take on survivors, along with other destroyers which lowered boats to pick up the Italians who had taken to the water. Three hours fifteen minutes lapsed before the last two men from the submarine were taken off and the boat sunk with depth charges. The Italian destroyers were spotted at 12:10 p.m. by a 228 Squadron Sunderland (L.5806) from Malta, about 50 nmi (58 mi; 93 km) west of Zakynthos in the Ionian Sea, west of Greece and about 150 nmi (173 mi; 278 km) from Position K. No course was given by the Sunderland crew and the Italian ships were thought to be heading for Kythira; at 4:10 p.m. the 7th Cruiser squadron turned north to intercept the Italian ships. At 4:40 p.m. a sighting by Sunderland (L.5803) had them still heading south, about 35 nmi (40 mi; 65 km) from Orion. Tovey ordered a turn to the south-west and an increase in speed to 25 kn (29 mph; 46 km/h). The cruisers sailed on a course of 180°, the 1st Cruiser Division, Orion, Neptune and Sydney to overhaul the Italians to starboard and the 2nd Cruiser Division, about 5 nmi (6 mi; 9 km) apart from Liverpool and Manchester to overtake them to port. The Italian destroyers were steaming south-east at high speed when they were spotted by Liverpool at 6:30 p.m., about 100 nmi (120 mi; 190 km) north of Tobruk; the cruiser commenced firing three minutes later at 18,000 yd (8.9 nmi; 10 mi; 16 km). The Italian ships had the notional speed to outrun the cruisers but their age, heavy loads and the sea state meant that the British ships slowly caught up. The Italians had been taken by surprise and could not launch torpedoes because of their deck cargoes but they were difficult to hit as they made smoke, darkness gathered and the ships sailed towards the afterglow of the sun. At 7:05 p.m. Neptune reported torpedoes and the British ships changed course to comb the spread. The 2nd Cruiser Division concentrated on Espero and by 7:20 p.m. had closed the range to 14,000 yd (7 nmi; 8 mi; 13 km) and the 1st Division turned 50° to starboard to bring all their turrets to bear ("opening 'A' arcs") but Espero was not hit until the fifteenth salvo. Baroni realized that his faster ships were doomed and decided to sacrifice Espero to enable the other two to escape, laid smoke and maneuvered evasively as Zeffiro and Ostro raced south-west. At 8:00 p.m. Espero was hit and brought to a stop. As night was falling and short of ammunition, Tovey abandoned the chase ten minutes later and changed course for Malta. Tovey ordered Sydney to finish off Espero and when at 6,000 yd (3 nmi; 3 mi; 5 km) received two shells from Espero and replied with four salvos, scoring hits. Espero began to burn from the bow to midships and at 8:35 p.m., Sydney closed to 2,000 yd (1,829 m) astern of the destroyer. Men jumped from the burning ship and there was an explosion near the bridge. At 8:40 p.m., with a list of almost 90°, Espero sank at 35° 18' N; 20° 8' E. Sydney lowered both of its boats to rescue survivors and used Jacob's ladders and Bosun's chairs to bring them aboard. The glare from Espero before it sank and the presence of Italian submarines led to the rescue effort being ended at 10:19 p.m. when all 47 survivors in sight had been collected. before Sydney sailed away, one of the cutters with oars, sails, foodstuffs, water and rifles was left behind and with a signal projector illuminated so that remaining survivors could board it. Three of the survivors died before the ship reached Alexandria and six others were found alive on a raft by the Italian submarine Topazio fourteen days later. At dawn, the 2nd Destroyer Flotilla was 160 nmi (184 mi; 296 km) west of Crete when the submarine Uebi Scebeli was caught on the surface. The submarine dived and was depth charged by three of the destroyers which forced Uebi Scebeli to the surface, where survivors were rescued. Dainty sank the submarine with gunfire at 8:20 am.; the destroyers made for Alexandria, arriving at about 7:00 p.m. on 30 June. Information was gleaned from the prisoners, of a submarine patrol line between Crete and the African coast; two destroyers were dispatched from Alexandria on an anti-submarine sortie near Derna, detected a submerged submarine on 1 July and claimed its sinking, although this was disproved when the ships returned on 2 July. Zeffiro and Ostro had reached Benghazi on 29 June and arrived at Tobruk shortly after; two-thirds of the convoy had survived. The smaller Pilo and Missori also reached Libya after being diverted to the port of Tripoli. The engagement had lasted for about 130 minutes and the 7th Cruiser Squadron fired about 5,000 shells. An Italian 4.7 in (120 mm) shell hit Liverpool 3 ft (0.91 m) above the waterline but caused little damage. Some of the prisoners on Sydney disclosed the purpose of the operation, that Espero had a company of 225 men and passengers embarked and that Baroni had been killed in the explosion near the bridge. The ammunition consumption of the British cruisers exacerbated a shortage of ammunition at Alexandria, where only 800 6-inch shells were in stock. The Battle of the Espero Convoy demonstrated that a daylight naval action at long range was likely to be indecisive and extravagant of ammunition. The 2nd Cruiser Division was so short of ammunition that it returned to Alexandria and the Malta convoys were postponed. The 1st Cruiser Division reached Alexandria on 1 July, having also been ineffectually bombed. Convoy AS 1 from the Aegean was attacked from 29 June to 1 July by Italian aircraft based in the Dodecanese Islands but reached Alexandria and Port Said undamaged on 2 and 3 July. In 1998, Green and Massignani wrote that had Italian aircraft spotted the Allied cruisers before they came within range, all three destroyers could have escaped. Baroni was posthumously awarded the Medaglia D´oro Al Valor Militare. The lack of ammunition and the danger of Italian submarines, led to the two Malta convoy sailings being postponed for two weeks, followed by Operation MF 5, culminating in the Battle of Punta Stilo (9 July 1940). On 5 July, nine Fairey Swordfish torpedo-bombers of 813 Naval Air Squadron, Fleet Air Arm flew from Sidi Barrani near the Egypt–Libya frontier, to attack the ships in Tobruk harbour. Twelve fighters of 33 Squadron covered the Swordfish and 211 Squadron attacked the airfield, damaged eight Fiat CR.42 fighters and flew reconnaissance sorties. The Swordfish dropped seven torpedoes in the harbour, sank Zeffiro and damaged the destroyer Euro; the merchantmen Manzoni and Serenitas were also sunk and the liner Liguria was damaged. On the evening after the attack on Tobruk, 830 Naval Air Squadron from Malta bombed the airfield at Catania in Sicily. Capetown and Caledon of the 3rd Cruiser Squadron with four destroyers, bombarded the port Bardia from 9,000 yd (5.1 mi; 8.2 km) at dawn on 6 July and hit two ships, before making ready to assist the crews of any aircraft damaged on the Tobruk raid; Italian aircraft attacked the ships to no effect. The guns of Zeffiro were salvaged from the harbour and sent to Bardia to augment the coastal defences.
×