Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'tech tree'.



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
    • Player Gatherings and Events
    • 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
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Master Archive
    • The Pigeon's Nest
    • Closed Beta Test Archive
    • Alpha Test Archive
    • For Development and Publisher Only
    • QA AUTO
    • Contests and Community Events
    • Super Test
    • Newcomer's Forum
    • Contest Entries
    • Questions and Answers
    • Contest Entries
    • New Captains
    • Guías y Estrategias
    • Task Force 58
    • Livestream Ideas and Feedback
    • Árboles Tecnológicos
    • Fan Art and Community Creations
    • Community Created Events and Contests
    • Community Staging Ground
    • Forum Reorg 2.0 Archive
    • Noticias y Anuncios

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 26 results

  1. May I suggest you put any existing ships currently available for purchase on the tech tree? In the IWBN category (it would be nice), a full blown National line would be even better. You could note if the ship was available, retired, etc... It would help immensely when wanting to see what you are going up against too, as sometimes finding out a ship's equipment is not so easy. I know it's doable because there's a mod available for it; but I, so like many others, don't like having to continually update mods every time the game updates. Wah. So on the day you haven't anything to do, maybe you could plan it out. A true QoL upgrade would be awesome in your update schedule. Like once a quarter or at least twice a year. tia fyc
  2. Alright, I've done one of these before, but it got lost when they changed the forums, and it needed an update for Agir, Seigfried, and Odin, any how. The first two (or three) ships in this list are Große Kreuzers (Large Cruisers), followed by a proto-Deutschland, Deutschland, a small battlecruiser, and then a split into a heavily armored line and a larger, faster, harder hitting line. Tier III Victoria Louise Displacement: 6491t max (Vineta and Hansa topped out at 6705t) Length: 110.6m Breadth: 17.4m Speed: 19.2 max Slopes: 100mm Citadel: 150mm Armament: 2x2 21cm SK L/40 8x 15cm/40 QF (casemate) 10x 88cm/30 QF (casemate) Hull(B) Armament: 2x2 21cm SK L/40 6x 15cm/40 QF (casemate) 10x 88cm/30 QF (casemate) 1x 88cm/30 QF Consumables: (Same on Hull A and B) Damage Control Party Victoria Louise, with her heavy armor, slow speed, large health pool, and heavy guns would serve as a good introduction to what players could expect from the first part of the line. Her two turret configuration would also serve as practice for larger ships, as well. She should allow for some low-tier supercruiser-esque gameplay. Tier IV Furst Bismarck Displacement: 11,461t max Length: 127m Breadth: 20.4m Speed: 18.7 kts Belt: 100-200mm Citadel: 200mm Armament: 2x2 24cm SK L/40 QF (actual bore diameter is 238mm) 12x 15cm/40 QF (casemate) 10x 88cm/30 QF (casemate) Consumables: Damage Control Tier V Enturf I/26 Displacement: Length: 186m Breadth: ~20m Speed: 28kts Belt: 100mm Citadel: 0mm Armament: 2x3 28cm SK C/28 4x2 12cm DP (unknown 40mm and 20mm can be added) Consumables: Damage Control Spotter -or- Fighter A draft of for the Deutschland-Class latter in the design process, she'll play much like the finalized Deutschland, but with less tools in his tool box (ie missing the torpedoes, hydro-acoustic search, and repair party). I still expect him to be a strong ship at tier 5, though he'll be vulnerable to strike craft from carriers, due to the lack of non-flak AA. Tier VI Deutschland Basically as Admiral Graf Spee. If you want the raw stats, I can list them. Tier VII Battlecruiser Design 1928 Displacement: 19,192t Length: 206m (waterline) Breadth: 25m Speed: 34kts Belt: 100mm Citadel: 0mm Armament: 4x2 30.5cm QF 3x3 15cm QF 4x1 8.8cm DP Consumables: Damage Control Hydro-Acoustic Search Fighter -or- Spotter Repair Party I included the 1928 Battlecruiser Design more out of a lack of anything else suitable for the spot. While the design was criticized for lacking staying power, in WoWs terms, she should have plenty, with a good chunk of health and repair party, though her weaker belt means that broadsiding will be punished severely. If anyone has any better suggestions, I welcome them. D-Line Split The slower, heavily armored line. Tier VIII D-Class Displacement: 20,000t Length: 230m Breadth: 25.5m Speed: 29kts Belt: 220mm Citadel: 50mm Armament: 2x4 28cm/52 QF 4x2 15cm/55 QF 4x2 10.5cm/65 DP (Various AA can be added) 2x4 Torpedo Tubes Consumables: Damage Control Hydro-Acoustic Search Fighter -or- Spotter Repair Party The mounting of quad turrets was discussed if there were any available. Using them in this design would provide a slightly different flavor, instead of using turrets from a ship 2 tiers lower. This line is about survivability, not firepower, so I think it is fine. Tier IX Neuentwurf II Displacement: 30,950t Length: 223m at waterline Breadth: 29.3m Speed: 28 kts Belt: 300mm Citadel: 45mm (Turtleback: 95mm) Armament: 3x3 28cm QF 8x1 15cm QF 5x2 10.5cm Consumables: Damage Control Hydro-Acoustic Search Fighter -or- Spotter Repair Party Neuentwurf II is distinct from Agir by have smaller, slightly faster firing guns, sacrificing speed for armor, a slightly beefed up secondary armament, and a lack of torpedoes. If it is felt that more firepower is needed, the triple 28cm turrets can be swapped for quadruple ones. Tier X Wargaming Fantasy Design (unless someone has a better alternative) P-Line The faster, harder hitting line. Tier VIII P-Class Displacement: 25,689t Length: 230m Breadth: 26m Speed: 33 kts Belt: 60mm Citadel: 145mm Armament: 2x3 30.5cm QF 2x2 15cm/55 QF 4x2 10.5/65 QF 2x4 Torpedo Tubes Consumables: Damage Control Hydro-Acoustic Search Fighter -or- Spotter Repair Party Tier IX O-Class Displacement: 35,400 max Length: 256 m Breadth: 30 m Speed: 35 kts Belt: 180 Citadel: 80mm Armament: 3x2 38.1cm/47 QF 3x2 15cm/48 QF 4x2 10.5cm/65 DP 4x2 3.7cm/83 AA 20x1 20cm AA 2x3 Torpedo Tubes Consumables: Damage Control Hydro-Acoustic Search Fighter -or- Spotter Repair Party Tier X Wargaming Fantasy Design (unless someone has a better alternative) Let me hear what ya'll think.
  3. I will start with a big sorry for the question but i am very curious about it. What is the difference on incoming regarding premium ships x tech tree ship? If i buy a perma camo for a tech tree she will receive the same amount as a premium ship money? is there a hidden value for beeing premium? if premium ship camo gives +20% income and a tech tree camo gives +20% income, isnt there an advantage to premium ship? They sell premium ships saying their income is better. is it not an advantage if we get a perma camo for a tech tree?
  4. Phoenix_jz’s Italian Battleship Tech Tree Hello all, I’m back at it again with tech trees, and this time I’m throwing out an idea for the Regia Marina, and its options for a battleship line. Now, as of we’ve got two Italian battleships in the game – the tier V rebuilt Cavour-class battleship Giulio Cesare, and the tier VIII Littorio-class battleship Roma. Italian battleships are fairly well represented by these two. Italian battleships fall short on AA, and their citadels tend to be somewhat tall (No magic boilers like in the Royal Navy, I guess) – but they’re usually fairly well protected. They’re quite mobile and tend to handle well for their size, and carry powerful, high-velocity guns with questionable accuracy. They tend to be quite stealthy for battleships, but at the cost of range. While I did initially draft out two lines, for this post I decided to only post the ‘main’ line, while I will perhaps make a post on the second at a later date (Spoiler – It’s lots of Ferrati designs - #outquadthefrogs). This main line is essentially the majority of what historical Italian battleships were. Like many Italian designs, speed tended to triumph over armor in order to sustain firepower – in order to defend Italy’s long coastlines from attack, Italian ships had to be able to rapidly deploy against enemy ships, dashing up or down the coast. Likewise, they also stressed artillery performance at range, thus the use of heavier than average shells at infamously high velocities. As a note, I’m not going to try and guess AA suites for B-hulls, but hitpoints would be for a B-hull. Major Line Features: You get: High Speed/Mobility – Generally speaking, these ships will be faster and have better handling than most other battleships Generally good levels of stealth, better than other battleships at the same tier Powerful guns with very high velocities, leading to high penetration, and good gun handling with their fast turret traverse times Unique SAP/AP flavor - Explained below Armor profile starts out as sub-par to mediocre, but becomes very powerful in higher tiers La bella figura– these ships look good. At the cost of; Generally sub-par AA for their tier The main battery range tends to be average to poor The guns share the poor dispersion of German and French battleships, offsetting their ease-of-aim. The main battery lacks HE The health pool of these ships is generally average, but at higher tiers falls behind the competition to a serious degree. They also have relatively high citadels compared to other lines with lower citadels (or physics-bending like the British) The SAP/AP Flavor, and Lack of HE There is only one part of the Italian battleship line’s flavor that can be defined as gimmicky, in the same way the French battleship’s speed boost, the German super-hydro, or British… everything? I’m not even sure where to start with them. This gimmick is that Italian battleships are unable to fire High-Explosive shells from their main battery. Why? Because that’s what the Italians did historically. Unlike their cruisers and destroyers, Italian battleships did not carry HE shells (In Italian; Granata Dirompente – I may refer to this round as ‘GD’ later in this write-up. These shells had an instant fuse and a bursting charge of 5-7% the mass of the shell). Rather, Italian battleship fired two types of Armor-Piercing shells; Palla (or sometimes Proiettile Perforante - PP) – These rounds were the pure Armor-Piercing rounds used by the Italian navy, designed to punch through as much armor as possible, and had small bursting charges of between 1-2% of the shell’s mass. Palla translates to literally ‘ball’, although it can also be used to describe a bullet. Proiettile Perforante would be in a literal sense Piercing Projectile, but the term is analogous to an Armor-Piercing shell in English. These terms describe the same kind of round regardless. This was the primary round to be used against the heavy armor on enemy battleships, and that was essentially their only purpose – the only exception is a curious note from a September 1942 document that advises the use of 320mm Palla against the American Baltimore-class heavy cruisers. This round was used outside of battleships only as the armor-piercing rounds of the 152mm guns used aboard Italian light cruisers. Granata Perforante (GP) – This type of round, with a name that blended that of the two other types of round, is often erroneously dubbed a High-Explosive by English sources (such as navweaps.com, and English translations of Italian books). Their name translating directly as Piercing Shell, these shells were essentially a Semi Armor-Piercing shell, with more explosive power than the pure AP rounds but less penetration, and like the AP used a delay fuse. These shells tended to be about 90% of the mass of Palla, and had on average only about 55-60% of the penetrative potential at most given ranges, but their bursting charges tended to be 2-5% the mass of the shells. This was the general-use round on Italian battleships, and was meant for use against carriers, cruisers, destroyers, and even the lighter armor of some battleships. These rounds also performed as the primary Armor-Piercing ammunition for the 203mm guns of Italian heavy cruisers as well as Italian 120 to 135mm destroyer guns – however performance did vary. As Italian heavy cruisers were still meant to duel and defeat enemy cruisers their shells tended to favor ‘palla’-style performance and had a smaller than average bursting charge, while the destroyers had higher values approaching those of GD rounds, as they were meant for use against very light armor only. An example of the qualitative differences of the two Italian AP types from official documents Essentially, what this boils down to is that Palla is the ‘Anti-Battleship’ round, while Granata Perforante is the ‘whatever else’ shell for Italian battleships, and that’s the flavor that will be reflected in the line. The performance of the round types thus will be as such: Palla (AP)– The same AP shells you’ve always known, these shells have the normal fuse time, and have high penetration. They’re great against battleships, being very punishing even against heavy belts because of their high penetration – however against cruisers, due to that penetration and their velocity retention, this will lead to over-penetrations in many cases. Weaker AP like that found on the 320mm and 305mm Italian guns will still be appropriate for use on cruisers, especially those with heavier armor, as their lower overall penetration and also higher tendency to lose speed (the WWI-era 305mm shells having poor drag performance typical of the era, while the 320mm shells of these guns when re-bored was still rather poor at about 4crh). Granata Perforante (SAP)–These shells will perform differently than regular AP. With higher velocity usually, these lighter shells might feel easier to aim, but they have fundamental differences. They deal less damage than the pure AP, and have much less penetration – they’re not going to do well against the main armor belts of enemy dreadnoughts. They also have short fuses similar to British battleship AP, meaning they’ll have a harder time reaching battleship citadels. However, the combination of less penetration and a shorter fuse time means they’ll tend to over-penetrate cruisers less in the way that Roma’s 381mm Palla does chronically in-game. They’ll also be better for hitting destroyers then regular AP, as well getting regular penetration against the softer areas of battleships that are too angled to penetrate – this will mean excellent damage farming off of German battleships, who’s incremental armor schemes guarantee regular 33% penetrations with ammunition of this type. To compensate for the lack of 'auto damage' that HE gives from raw penetration and fires, these shells have auto-ricochet angles identical to those of Hood's AP - 60° and 67.5°, rather than the normal 45° and 60°> The Tree: Quick Breakdown: III: Cuniberti 17t – Designer Vittorio Cuniberti’s 17000t dreadnought design – the real first dreadnought. IV: Dante Alighieri – Italy’s first dreadnought, Nikolai Iis a Russian version of her. V: Conte di Cavour – The original version of what Cesare’s sister once was, a heavy broadside defines this WWI battleship, with thirteen guns. VI: Caio Duilio – The successor class to the Cavour as rebuilt, this is essentially a better Giulio Cesare. VII: BB1935 – A design that existed beforeLittorio, it uses the 320mm guns in a modern layout with high speed and balanced armor VIII: Littorio – Roma’s sister, she’s similar to Romabut a more comfortable ship with more reliable performance IX: Impero – The third Littorio, this is Littorio as intended, essentially the tier VIII turned up to 10, if the Littorio’s performance was tuned down to 8 (which it kind of is) X: BB1936 – The 406mm design that existed next to Littorio, it was the ultimate expression of Italian battleship design – she’s dwarfed by the tier X BBs of other nations, but is faster, well protected, and has a very strong armament. Tier III – (Cuniberti 17000t) Napoli The design that started it all. The Italian Naval Engineer Vittorio Cuniberti first put his name on the map when he designed the 1901 Regina Elena-class battleships. Pre-dreadnoughts, they had followed the high speed stereotype Italian ships had already gathered for themselves in the latter half of the 1800s, despite the country being so young. At 22 knots, they were the fastest battleships in the world, even after the first dreadnoughts were completed. This, of course, came at the cost of armor (their belt was 250mm, which actually was fairly average for the era). These pre-dreadnoughts were unusual as although their medium battery of guns was exceptionally heavy (6x2 203mm guns, six to a broadside), their heavy battery was very light – only two 305mm/40’s in single turrets, one fore, one aft. The reason for this was more important than one might think, at first glance. The Regina Elena-class in fact had its origins in Cuniberti’s own work, on a 1899 design for a powerful 8000 ton armored cruiser featuring a uniform main battery of twelve 203mm guns, a top speed of 22 knots, and a 150mm belt. It was to be the ultimate Armored Cruiser, faster and better armed than any other. Such a design would ultimately be realized eight years later by the German Kaiserliche Marine in the Armored Cruiser Blücher of 1907 (6x2 210mm, 25 knots, 180mm belt), but not so for the Regia Marina. The design was rejected, and Cuniberti turned it into the 13000 ton ‘battlecruiser’-style Regina Elena-class, whose design philosophy was to be faster than any enemy battleship, and far outgun any enemy cruiser – which it accomplished for its era. Two were built, the Regina Elena and Vittorio Emmanuelle, both laid down in 1901. However, the Italian navy wanted two more battleships, and this time Cuniberti decided to revisit his old concept, and put it on a battleship as he had originally envisioned it – the ‘all-big-gun’ battleship. Thus he took the Regina Elena design to the same place he had taken his armored cruiser design – the ship grew to a displacement of 17000 tons, and featured the single most powerful armament ever put to sea – twelve 305mm guns in four twin and four single turrets. It is important to understand the context in which this came about. Fire Control Systems had come far from their origins, but were still extremely primitive in this era. The range to which they were effective was out to a few thousand yards – massively superior to where they had been only a few decades prior, where a few hundred yards was the extreme limit of naval gunnery. For this reason, the big guns of a battleship were of less use. At the ranges they fought, their main guns had more than enough penetration, and fired slowly. Smaller-caliber weapons still had enough penetration, but could fire faster, and more could be mounted for much less weight. Thus, they were much more effective at closer ranges. However, Cuniberti envisioned that as fire control became better, battles would increasingly be dominated by longer-ranged gunnery from the heavy guns. His ‘all-big-gun’ battleship would simply be able to overwhelm the enemy with large-caliber fire, smashing them under a deluge of heavy shells, and moving on to the next in line. The ships’ own armor would be strong enough to resist enemy fire in return. One of these ships would be worth many of the enemy’s battleships, and six of these would be a force powerful enough to deter any fleet in the world from challenging them. This behemoth was meant to go 24 knots as well, thus being able to run down any major warship in the world – but this is unlikely on a 17000 ton hull, 21 knots being a more realistic speed given the size of machinery of the era. 24 knots would have required a much greater displacement of about 21000 tons. Ultimately the Italian navy rejected the design due to its prohibited cost, but allowed Cuniberti to publish his idea in Jane’s All the World’s Fighting Ships 1903, where he recommended the design be pursued by the British Royal Navy. Meanwhile, the Italian navy built two further Regina Elena’s, laid down in 1903 as Roma and Napoli (hence why I’ve adopted the name Napoli for ours in-game). In May 1905, Cuniberti’s ideas were vindicated. The Russo-Japanese War saw the Battle of Tsushima fought, which was decided primarily by long-range gunnery, at staggering ranges exceeding 5 km reaching all the way to 7 km. The evidence was enough for Britain’s First Sea Lord Admiral Sir John Fisher, who had been exploring the idea of these big-gun ships already. That October, Britain laid down their first all-big gun battleship as the HMS Dreadnought, obsoleting every battleship afloat overnight. Roma, the sister to the Napoli that was ultimately built. Napoli was Italy's last pre-dreadnought battleship. Survivability: 21800 tons – 36600 HP Belt: 305mm belt, 305mm turrets and barbettes Main Armament: 4x2, 4x1 305mm/40 RoF: 2 rpm (30 sec) Dispersion/Sigma: German, 1.8 Traverse: ?º/sec AP: MV: 780mps Mass/Dmg: 417 kg (MaxDmg: 8100) SAP: MV: 780mps Mass/Dmg: 386 kg (MaxDmg: 7800) Secondary Battery: 12x1 76mm/40 Ansaldo 1916 RoF: 15 rpm (4 sec) HE: MV: 680mps Mass/Dmg: 6.5 kg (MaxDmg: 1100, 4% FC) Maneuverability: Engine Power: 50606 shp Top Speed: 24 knots All in all she’s your pretty standard tier III – probably faster than most, but still only having an eight-gun broadside. You’ll be out of it in a second, so I don’t think I need to elaborate on her. Sail around derping eight-gun broadsides into enemy ships, and profit, like any other battleship at this tier. Tier IV – Dante Alighieri … con l’animo che vince ogni battaglia The first Italian dreadnought, the Alighieri was unusual and ambitious. Her design was meant to maximize Cuniberti’s vision, by allowing all of the ship’s main guns to fire to her broadside. She was light for her size, but had a heavy broadside of twelve 305mm guns, with a sub-par 254mm belt and a top speed of 22 knots. She carries the distinction of being the only battleship to ever be named after a Poet, but make no mistake – Dante Alighieri is no mere poet, at least not in Italy. While to most he is the famed author of la Divina Commedia, in Italy he is something more, considered the father of the modern Italian language. La Commedia was one of the first European works written outside of Latin, and Alighieri chose to write it in a Tuscan dialect he referred to as ‘Italian’ – marking one of the first ‘modern’ appearances of the concept as Italy as a nation and an identify. This was grasped onto by the Risorgimento movement, and formed an important pillar of the Italian identity used to unify the peninsula. Laid down on the 9th of June 1909, she was the first battleship to be laid down with its armament mounted in triple turrets, and was completed in 1913. Her career remained uneventful, and despite taking part in the First World War and several Adriatic operations, due to the nature of Adriatic Theater in WWI she never saw action against Austrian dreadnoughts. She served as a testing platform for important gunnery and fire control technologies, and was scrapped in 1928. Her motto, “… con l’animo che vince ogni battaglia” comes from Canto 24 of L’Inferno, words Virgil speaks to Alighieri to boost his moral – the line is usually translated in (modern) English as “...with the spirit that overcomes every battle”. Survivability: 21800 tons – 36600 HP Belt: 254mm between end barbettes, 100mm to bow. Main deck is 50mm with 50mm turtleback slopes, upper deck is 30 or 38mm. 254mm turret faces. Main Armament: 4x3 305mm/46 Modello 1909 (Broadside: 12 guns) RoF: 2 rpm (30 sec) Dispersion/Sigma: German, 1.8 Traverse: ?º/sec AP: MV: 840mps Mass/Dmg: 452 kg (MaxDmg: 8700) SAP: MV: 840mps Mass/Dmg: 401.2 kg (MaxDmg: 8200) Secondary Battery: 4x2, 12x1 120mm/50 Modello 1909 (Broadside: 10) RoF: 6 rpm (10 sec) HE: MV: 850mps Mass/Dmg: 22.1 kg (MaxDmg: 1700, 6% FC) Anti-Aircraft Battery: 4x1 76mm/50 Modello 1909 - 16.8 dps @ 3.00 km 2x1 40mm/39 Vickers 1917 - 11.2 dps @ 2.01 km Maneuverability: Engine Power: 32190 shp Top Speed: 22.8 knots Dante Alighieri is going to look somewhat similar to some people, because of Russia’s own version – the Imperator Nikolai I. While it is true that Italian design did have influence on Russian dreadnought design of the period, it has not actually been indicated by any surviving documents that the Russian 4x3 designs, very similar to the Alighieri, were actually inspired by it, and so such Russian battleship design appears to be an independent development. So, what you should expect from Dante is something of a Nikolai-lite. While less armored, she has similarly powerful guns – a lighter shell (452 kg vs 470.9 kg), but fired at a much higher velocity (840 mps vs 762 mps). She’s got a 1.8 knot speed edge over the Russian dreadnought, but overall weaker armor (270mm belt on Nikolai) and their secondary battery being about equal – both having a 10-gun broadside, the Russian battleship bringing larger 130mm guns while the Italian 120mm guns fire faster. AA armament of both is rather minimal. However, the playstyle will be similar. Despite her thinner armor, Dante is well suited to bow-on tactics, and with three of her four turrets facing forwards, is well suited to swapping fire from port to starboard rapidly, regardless of what her turret traverse may be. Tier V – Conte di Cavour A nessuno secondo The follow-on class to Italy’s first dreadnought, the Cavour-class battleship was meant to be a response to French building, but as Italy lacked a 13.5” (343mm) gun to upgrade to for their battleships, they sought to use an even heavier armament of 12” guns – this time mounting thirteen 305mm rifles. The same as those used on Dante, these had a superior layout, a triple turret with a twin turret super-firing over it both fore and aft, while a single triple turret found a home amidships. Less ambitious in speed, it saw an engine power increase to compensate the increased displacement, and typical of Italian design, to achieve a speed advantage of 1-2 knots over the 20-21 knot dreadnoughts of foreign navies. Armor was slightly improved over the Alighieri, but speed saw a decrease - despite the target speed of 22.5 knots, the top speed was only 22 knots. Cavour was named for the Count of Cavour, Camilo Benso. Prime Minister of Sardinia-Pedimonte, he was instrumental in the formation of Italy as a nation, essentially Italy’s counterpart to Otto von Bismarck. He became the country’s first Prime Minister. Her motto was ‘Second to none’, written by the famous writer, war hero, and eventual proto-fascist Gabriele D’Annunzio. Survivability: 24250 tons – 39500 HP Belt: 250mm between end barbettes, 80mm to bow. Main deck is 50mm with 50mm turtleback slopes, upper deck is 30 or 38mm. 280mm turret faces. Main Armament: 2x2, 3x3 305mm/46 Modello 1909 (Broadside: 13 guns) RoF: 2 rpm (30 sec) Dispersion/Sigma: German, 1.8 Traverse: Dunno lol AP: MV: 840mps Mass/Dmg: 452 kg (MaxDmg: 8700) SAP: MV: 840mps Mass/Dmg: 401.2 kg (MaxDmg: 8200) Secondary Battery: 18x1 120mm/45 Modello 1909 (Broadside: 9) RoF: 6 rpm (10 sec) HE: MV: 850mps Mass/Dmg: 22.1 kg (MaxDmg: 1700, 6% FC) Anti-Aircraft Battery: 6x1 76mm/50 Modello 1909 - 25.2 dps @ 3.00 km 2x1 40mm/39 Vickers 1917 - 11.2 dps @ 2.01 km Maneuverability: Engine Power: 31278 shp Top Speed: 22.3 knots Conte di Cavour is an interesting ship, especially considering that her sister, Giulio Cesare, is Italy’s tier V premium battleship. Well, here’s the thing to keep in mind. Cesare is utterly OP at tier V. It’s outright comedic how well she does, and legend has it that in a lost Canto, Dante places her in the forgotten tenth circle of hell where not even the Devil himself was made to suffer. So we’re not comparing these sisters. No, rather, we’re comparing Cavour to other WWI dreadnoughts like Bretagne, Iron Duke, and König. With an identical turret layout to these ships, they’re pretty easy to compare. König, with her thick belt and turtleback, is by far the most durable, Iron Duke not far behind her, with Cavour trailing and Bretagne in last. Pretty much the same order follows for speed, at 24, 22.5, 22.0, and 21 knots. Firepower is where they vary. The Entente dreadnoughts bring 10x 340/343mm guns firing 2 rpm, and while König brings 10 guns as well, they’re only 305mm guns… but fire faster, at 2.3 rpm. Cavour only fires at 2 rpm with 305mm guns… but has 13 of them. Her penetration should be the best among 12” guns, and the extra three barrels allows her to easily keep up in shell output. Meanwhile, the extra barrels also let her compete with the damage output of the British and French battleships, which she also has more penetration than. Thus, she has similar flexibility to the other battleships with her speed, and although her armor is hardly stellar, it’s adequate. Her main battery is fearsome, thirteen guns throwing heavy shells at high speeds allowing her to hit hard father away then her caliber would seem to suggest. Like many other Italian battleships, her weakness is her mediocre-at-best AA battery, and relatively low health pool for her tier. Tier VI – Caio Duilio Nomen numen The Caio Duilio-class battleships were a follow-on of the prior Cavour-class, and a response to the French Bretagne-class battleships. Since the Regia Marina was satisfied with the prior class and considered them on-par with the Bretagne-class, the Duilio-class ultimately ended up being largely an improved version of the Cavour-class with a revised secondary battery, superstructure, and the decision to accept a lower speed being the primary differences. Caio Duilio was named for the famous Roman admiral Gaius Duilius, who commanded the republic’s fleet at the Battle of Mylae and won Roma’s astounding first naval victory against Hannibal Gisco’s superior Carthaginian fleet. In the inter-war period, as tensions rapidly shot up in the 1930s the Regia Marina began a major revision to its main battleline, which had changed little since the end of the First World War, save for the losses of Dante Alighieri and Leonardo da Vinci and minor modernizations to the battleships as a whole. In response to the French construction of the Dunkerque, the Italian Navy essentially rebuilt the Cavour-class, leaving barely 40% of the original ships behind. As tensions continued to rise, and it became clear that war with Britain was likely, the Regia Marina sought to bring its battleline up to snuff as rapidly as possible, and thus the decision was made to rebuild the Duilio-class in the same radical manner as the Cavour’s. An improved version of the Cavour project, the rebuilding of Caio Duilio and Andrea Doria saw something similar to the Cavour rebuilds, with several notable differences. Like the Cavour-class, their armor was slightly increased, the hull lengthened, and machinery replaced, making the ships capable of 26 knots (one knot slower than the Cavour rebuilds which could make 27 knots, but both classes were still able to force up to 28 knots). The middle turret was removed, and the other guns were bored out from 305/46’s to 320/44’s, greatly increasing their punching power. The Duilio-class had an extra 3º of elevation compared to the Cavourrebuilds giving them an extra 800m of range, but more importantly had a better Fire Control System, making them more capable of engaging targets at range. Their AA battery was far superior to Cavour’s, mounting a battery of 10x1 of the excellent 90mm/50 AA guns rather than the obsolete 100mm/47’s. It also included more 37mm AA guns. Finally, instead of the 6x2 120mm battery of Cavour, Duilio had a 4x3 battery of 135mm guns. Survivability: 24250 tons – 39500 HP Belt: 250mm between end barbettes, 80mm to bow. Main deck is 100mm over magazines, 80mm over machinery spaces, 30mm outboard. A lower portion of deck armor (vertical armor was 70mm) was 74mm thick 24mm turtleback, upper deck is 44mm. 240mm turret faces. Main Armament: 2x2, 2x3 320mm/44 Ansaldo Modello 1936 (Broadside: 10 guns) RoF: 2 rpm (30 sec) Dispersion/Sigma: German, 1.9 Traverse: 5º/sec (36 sec) AP: MV: 830mps Mass/Dmg: 525 kg (MaxDmg: 9300) SAP: MV: 830mps Mass/Dmg: 475 kg (MaxDmg: 8900) Secondary Battery: 4x3 135mm/50 Modello 1937 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 7 rpm (8.57 sec) HE: MV: 825mps Mass/Dmg: 32.7 kg (MaxDmg: 2000, 7% FC) 10x1 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 (Broadside: 5) RoF: 15 rpm (4.0 sec) HE: MV: 860mps Mass/Dmg: 10.1 kg (MaxDmg: 1300, 5% FC) Anti-Aircraft Battery: 10x1 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 - 95.0 dps @ 3.99 km 6x2 37mm/54 Breda 1932 - 69.6 dps @ 3.51 km 3x1 37mm/54 RM 1939 - 26.7 dps @ 3.51 km 8x2 20mm/65 Breda 1935 - 27.2 dps @ 2.01 km Maneuverability: Engine Power: 75000 shp Top Speed: 26.0 knots Special Consumables: Speed Boost - Standard So, what is Caio Duilio at her core? Well, she looks very similar to Cesare on the surface, and… well, simply put, that’s exactly what the case is. The class was originally built very similarly, and the rebuilds followed a similar path. The biggest diversion between the two ships comes in raw speed and secondary/AA firepower. Duilio’s broadside of six 135mm guns hit harder than the six 120mm guns of Cesare… but fires more slowly (7 rpm vs 10 rpm), albeit firing HE rather than AP. The 90mm guns on Doria are more numerous and fire faster, although less damaging (40x 100mm shells per minute versus 75x 90mm shells per minute). Her AA firepower is head and shoulders above that of Cesare, but she’s also one knot slower for her base speed. Given the fact that Cesare is OP as sin at tier V regardless of being uptiered… Caio Duilio makes for a strong contender at tier VI, being fast, stealthy, and still hard-hitting. She’s got the speed and stealth to escape ships that are more powerful than her, and yet she’s fast enough to run down other battleships at similar tiers, as well as chase down cruisers that are doing the wiggles – especially with her speed boost, which allows her to force her engine power in order to reach just over 28 knots (28.08 knots). However, she will struggle more at higher tiers. Being able to meet tier VIII battleships, she will encounter battleships that are faster, better armored, and better armed than her. For this, her great level of stealth inherited from Cesare will need to be exploited. The motto is an ancient Roman phrase that explains itself handily; "The name means power.” Tier VII – (BB1935) Leonardo da Vinci Non si volta chi a stella è fiso ‘BB1935’ finds its origins in one of the 1935 studies for a 26500 ton battleship to counter French construction following their decision to build the Dunkerque. The study called for a 26500 ton battleship armed with main guns of either 305 or 320mm, and a top speed of 30 knots. General Pugliese, who was in charge of the project, went around to over a dozen Admirals in attempt to get a consensus of what was most wanted. Although I’m sure you don’t need me to tell you the obvious, the results were… diverse, to say the least. Layouts varied drastically, using everything from triples to twins to quads. In total some 9 different designs were drawn up, which looked like everything from Nelson to Dunkerqueto reverse King George V... well, you get the idea. Oh, and Admiral de Feo had a design in there too, which is pretty much all you need to know about thatone. The one we’re looking at is one of the larger designs, which managed to grow to 30000 tons. It featured a main battery of 3x3 320mm guns, a top speed of 30 knots, and protection similar to Littorio. The secondary battery included 140mm guns in either triple or quad turrets, but since no 140mm guns existed within the Regia Marina, I’d assume the most likely choice of armament would have been the 135mm/45. The intended TDS system was Pugliese’s own. The name I’m borrowing form the third member of the Conte di Cavour-class battleships, which suffered a magazine detonation in port and was ultimately scrapped after an ambitious yet expensive recovery operation. Unlike some of the other names on this list, I’m sure I don’t need to cover her name, as da Vinci is quite famous and well-known far beyond Italy’s borders. The motto is a quote from the MC himself, which in English usually comes out as “He who is fixed to a star does not change his mind” Survivability: 30000 tons – 46300 HP Belt: 350mm between end barbettes inclined, at 11º, Main deck most likely at least 100mm on 12mm plating with a 36mm on 9mm upper deck. Upper belt perhaps 70mm. Main Armament: 3x3 320mm/44 Ansaldo Modello 1936 (Broadside: 9 guns) RoF: 2 rpm (30 sec) Dispersion/Sigma: German, 2.0 Traverse: 5º/sec (36 sec) AP: MV: 830mps Mass/Dmg: 525 kg (MaxDmg: 9300) SAP: MV: 830mps Mass/Dmg: 475 kg (MaxDmg: 8900) Secondary Battery: 4x3 135mm/45 Modello 1937 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 7 rpm (8.57 sec) HE: MV: 825mps Mass/Dmg: 32.7 kg (MaxDmg: 2000, 7% FC) 12x1 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 15 rpm (4.0 sec) HE: MV: 860mps Mass/Dmg: 10.1 kg (MaxDmg: 1300, 5% FC) Anti-Aircraft Battery: 12x1 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 - 114.0 dps @ 4.50 km 6x2 37mm/54 Breda 1932 - 69.6 dps @ 3.51 km 3x1 37mm/54 RM 1939 - 26.7 dps @ 3.51 km 8x2 20mm/65 Breda 1935 - 27.2 dps @ 2.01 km Maneuverability: Engine Power: 100000 shp Top Speed: 30.0 knots Perhaps best described as a link between Caio Duilio and Littorio, the 1935 mini-Littorio design (Littorino?) combined the firepower of the Italian rebuilds with the speed and protection that the Littorio-class was to have. Littorino would find such an ‘in-between’ playstyle in-game, the first truly tanky Italian battleship, with a similar combination of the tankiness and mobility available to Roma, with a similar AA suite. The main battery, three triple 320mm mounts, would start to sag, the guns being excellent at tier V, comfortably adequate at tier VI, but starting to get long in the tooth at tier VII, where tier IX battleships are a potential opponent. However, this weakness in firepower is the price that will have to be paid for having such a capable hull – 30 knots at tier VII with a hull that’s supposed to be as durable as Roma, and similar anti-aircraft firepower. I’ve also decided to extend the range of the 90mm/50 AA guns to 4.5 km, as: A) 4.0 km range on a tier VII+ BB is just stupid (side glance at Roma) B) This shows the greater performance of the 90mm mounts on Littorio versus Caio Duilio– the smaller battleship’s mounts were simply to close to the waterline and invasion of water was impossible to prevent – thus their RPC systems had to be disabled, while Littorio’s RPC systems remained intact for the 90mm AA guns It’s possibly the guns would need a RoF higher than 2 rpm in order to stay competitive, but as of now I’ve kept it there because I desire to avoid dipping into unrealistic reload times, and 2 rpm is the highest I’ve seen for these guns. Tier VIII – Littorio Molte nemici, molto onore The largest and most powerful class of battleships built by the Italian Navy, the ‘35000 ton’ (standard displacement was in excess of 40000 tons in reality) Littorio-class was a response to France building a second Dunkerque-class battleship and the subsequent breakdown in negotiations of battleship construction that had been taking place between the two nations. The design ended up being a bit of a test bed for the Italian Navy, featuring Pugliese’s torpedo defense system in full, and a new system of armor defense revolving around decapping of Armor-Piercing projectiles. The deck armor system had a 36mm upper deck laminated on 9mm plating to decap incoming shells, while the main deck was either 100mm (machinery) or 150mm (magazines) laminated on 12mm plating. The result was somewhat contradictory – her magazines were probably better protected from deck penetration than those of any other battleship save Yamato, but its machinery deck protection rates as one of the worst of the modern fast battleships, closer to ships like Bismarck and North Carolina than South Dakota, Iowa, Yamato, or Richelieu. However the belt was a different matter, a composite structure consisting of a 70mm homogenous armor decapping plate, a 250mm gap filled with cellulite, and a 280mm belt of Terni Cemented FH armor. The result was a belt that was largely immune to penetration from almost any gun ever put to sea – and even if splinters should result, two layers of splinter bulkheads existed within the ship before the splinters could actually hit the citadel bulkhead itself. The Littorio also mounted the most powerful guns ever mounted on an Italian battleship, the 381mm/50 Modello 1934. Firing an 884.8 kg Armor-Piercing shell at 850mps, and an 824.3 kg SAP shell at 880mps, it was the most powerful 15” rifle ever created, with belt penetration surpassing that of the American 16”/50 Mk.7 (WWII shells) or the Japanese 46cm/45 – although its deck penetration was inferior by a wide margin due to the shallow angles of impact. Although the full engine power was 160,000 shp, a lower operating speed of 128,200 shp was generally used during the wartime, on which she could make 30 knots. In-game, she’s largely a variation of Roma. Littorio was named after the Lictor, the one who would carry the fasces in ancient Rome – the fasces being the symbol of fascism. The motto used an oft-used saying of fascism – “Many enemies, much honor”. Littorio was the only ship of her class to use a motto. In what is probably the most famous picture of the class, Littorio and Vittorio Veneto conduct gunnery exercises together Survivability: 45236 tons – 64300 HP Belt: 375mm between end barbettes inclined at 11º with an internal 40mm bulkhead (yes, I'm keeping the nerfed internal armor, for the sake of balance with Roma), Main deck is 162-112mm with a 45mm upper deck. Upper belt is 70mm. Turret Faces are 380mm sloped at 30º Main Armament: 3x3 381mm/50 Ansaldo Modello 1934 (Broadside: 9 guns) RoF: 2 rpm (30 sec) Dispersion/Sigma: German, 1.8 Traverse: 6º/sec (30 sec) AP: MV: 850mps Mass/Dmg: 884.8 kg (MaxDmg: 12000) SAP: MV: 880mps Mass/Dmg: 824.3 kg (MaxDmg: 11800) Secondary Battery: 4x3 152mm/55 OTO Modello 1936 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 5 rpm (12 sec) AP: MV: 910mps Mass/Dmg: 50 kg (MaxDmg: 3100) 12x1 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 15 rpm (4.0 sec) HE: MV: 860mps Mass/Dmg: 10.1 kg (MaxDmg: 1300, 5% FC) Anti-Aircraft Battery: 12x1 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 - 114.0 dps @ 4.50 km 8x2 37mm/54 Breda 1932 - 92.8 dps @ 3.51 km 4x1 37mm/54 RM 1939 - 35.6 dps @ 3.51 km 8x2 20mm/65 Breda 1935 - 27.2 dps @ 2.01 km Maneuverability: Engine Power: 128200 shp Top Speed: 30.0 knots So, how does Littorio differ from Roma, our already existing premium? In subtle, but telling ways, as she’s not a straight clone. First and foremost, she loses out on durability, with 1100 less hitpoints and a less effective TDS (-10% - and yes, I know I haven't been listing TDS. This is the only time it really mattered). She also trades away her generally ineffective HE for the trademark Italian SAP rounds. She also isn’t as stealthy, visible from 820m further than Roma (from 14.94 km to 15.76 km, or a drop from the fully built 11.22 km to 11.82 km), but also able to fire farther away, base range increasing from 18.12 km to 18.94 km (21.74 to 22.73 km with a spotter aloft). You also have a considerably more capable mid-range AA suite and an extra 500m range on your long-range AA, making you somewhat more capable of defending yourself. With this changes, Littorio will still play similarly to Roma, but with a greater emphasis on staying a little farther away, as well as being less reliant on someone else’s AA. You’re not as stealthy, and torpedoes will hurt you more, not to mention you’ve got slightly less health overall – but at least you’ve got a little more breathing room when it comes to firing back, and you’ve got SAP shells to use so you don’t overpen cruisers quite as often. Tier IX – Impero Laid down as the third Littorio sister but never completed, Impero was one of the ‘second’ generation Littorio-class battleships along with her sister Roma, making the pair somewhat of a slightly different set of siblings… perhaps a second set of twins, if you consider both pairs to be Irish twins? Originally the successors to the Littorio-class would have been the ‘BB1936’ designs (which was adapted into the Ansaldo’s Project 41, which was then sold to the Soviet Union and played an important role in the design of the Projekt 23 Sovetsky Soyuz-class’s design), essentially much larger, 406mm gun armed Littorio’s, but as raw material came harder to come by in the years running up to WWII (due to Allied sanctions), and the need to finish the projects quickly for a 1943/44 war, a second set of slightly improved Littorio’s was chosen instead – Impero laid down in May of 1938, and Roma four months later. Impero, as I’m choosing to represent her here, is the Littorio-class unleashed. As we know it in-game (Roma), the class underperforms in many aspects, especially protection (many of the interior bulkheads scrapped) and the efficiency of the main belt, 375mm in game… which is a fraction of what it was capable. While technically speaking the MAB’s strength is a blank check (decapping against Face-Hardened is different then against homogenous – essentially if you decap the shell, it’s just going to either fail to penetrate, or just shatter, unless it’s of sufficient caliber. You’d need a 470mm shell to actually guarantee punching through Littorio’s belt), we do have one strength figure – able to resist her own shells at 16 km through tests. In-game, Roma has just over 490mm of penetration at this range. Likewise, the engine only operates at about 80% power in-game, compared to its 160000 shp full output. On top of that output, it was able to boost power by a further 12% in emergency situations – getting you just short of 180000 shp. In terms of their actual ability, Littorio somewhat straddles the line between tier VIII and IX with our in-game system – her biggest drawbacks are the raw dpm cap of only nine 381mm guns at tier IX, the low health, and the weak AA… but her protection, speed, and absurd penetration balance this out considerable. Impero (lit. “Empire” in English) was named for the new ‘Italian Empire’ proclaimed by Mussolini. Survivability: 45236 tons – 64300 HP Belt: 420mm between end barbettes inclined at 11º with an internal 36mm bulkhead, with a 24mm bulkhead ~4 meters further inside the hull. Main deck is 162-112mm with a 45mm upper deck. Upper belt is 70mm. Turret Faces are 380mm sloped at 30º Main Armament: 3x3 381mm/50 Ansaldo Modello 1934 (Broadside: 9 guns) RoF: 2.14 rpm (28 sec) Dispersion/Sigma: German, 2.0 Traverse: 6º/sec (30 sec) AP: MV: 850mps Mass/Dmg: 884.8 kg (MaxDmg: 12000) SAP: MV: 880mps Mass/Dmg: 824.3 kg (MaxDmg: 11800) Secondary Battery: 4x3 152mm/55 OTO Modello 1936 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 5 rpm (12 sec) AP: MV: 910mps Mass/Dmg: 50 kg (MaxDmg: 3100) 12x1 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 15 rpm (4.0 sec) HE: MV: 860mps Mass/Dmg: 10.1 kg (MaxDmg: 1300, 5% FC) Anti-Aircraft Battery: 12x1 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 - 114.0 dps @ 4.50 km 8x2 37mm/54 Breda 1932 - 92.8 dps @ 3.51 km 4x1 37mm/54 RM 1939 - 35.6 dps @ 3.51 km 8x2 20mm/65 Breda 1935 - 27.2 dps @ 2.01 km Maneuverability: Engine Power: 160000 shp Top Speed: 32.0 knots Impero becomes Roma on steroids. Or rather, she’s Roma, but without a broken ankle and a few cracked ribs. She’s fast at 32 knots, second only to the 32 knot + speed boost French battleships and the American battleships Iowa and Missouri. Her armor gives her fantastic resistance – the 70mm upper belt and 45mm upper deck giving very good protection against HE spam, and her defense against AP being out of this world. Her 420mm/11º main armor belt (the thickness being a compromise) is quite strong, allowing her to resist her own shells at just past 18.5 km broadside, and angled at only 30º she can resist her own shells at 15 km, the American 16”/50 within 16 km, and the Japanese 18.1”/45 at just over 19 km… without taking into account her internal bulkheads, and her thin citadel, despite how thin it is… because WG removed her innermost citadel bulkhead… Blue is actual, green is the current citadel. Even if they punch through the main belt, it’s almost impossible for any short fuse (hi, Royal Navy) BBs to thus hit the citadel – which means it has to be travelling at least 164mps. Shooting a broadside Impero at 10 km or greater with the French 380/45 would penetrate the belt, sure (well, until you hit 18 km) – but the shell won’t actually reach the citadel. You’ve got to be within 10 km to still have enough time to hit the belt before the shell’s fuse runs out after going through the main belt and first splinter bulkhead. In terms of firepower, she uses the same guns as Roma, but this time comes with 2.0 sigma, and a 28 second reload – somewhat offsetting the fact that you’re somewhat hurt by autobounce and having just nine barrels (Alsace still had similar caliber-weapons, but has twelve of them!). In terms of her actually getting hits, however, she should be fine. Alsace generally averages higher rates of hitting than Richelieu(7.9 shells per minute versus Richelieu’s 4.9 rpm), but that’s only a product of having 12 vs 8 guns and access to the RoF module. Without said module, it drops to 7 shells per minute, and with only 8 guns this would be 4.6 shells – Richelieu’s higher sigma (1.8 vs 1.7) coming into play. Roma, with 1.8 sigma, averages 5.4 shells. Keeping that sigma would give you 5.8 spm, 6.6 spm with the reload module. With 2.0 sigma, you’re easily seeing a similar number of shells as what Alsace achieves… and the 381/50’s AP is stronger than that of the 380/45. She’s Roma turned up to 12. Her AA is still anything but stellar, but it’s at least somewhere just under ‘on-par’ for tier IX. She’s fast, she’s durable, and she still hits hard – just more often. Tier X – (BB1936) Piave The ultimate evolution of the Italian battleship, ‘BB1936’, often known as UP.41 (Ufficiale Progetto 41 by Ansaldo’s nomenclature), this wasn’t so much an evolution past Littorio so much as it was the original idea. The Littorio’s design work was largely done under the jurisdiction of the WNT, which limited battleship design to 35000 tons standard displacement with an armament not exceeding 406mm. Naturally, just as every country had rushed to design a ship fitting the most 203mm (maximal caliber) guns as possible on a 10000 ton hull with their heavy cruisers, they did the same as with the battleships. This evolution was part of the same process that lead to Littorio, but the designers struggled as they felt it was too difficult to for nine 406mm guns on a sufficiently protected hull and get it to go 30 knots under an operational load. The weight reduction in terms of armament from choosing lower caliber weapons, in combination with the relative ease of developing new 381mm guns versus 406mm guns, lead them to shrink the armament down to ‘only’ nine 381mm guns as the project developed into what eventually became Littorio. However, development did not stop there, as Ansaldo continued to play with the design, and it grew, BB1936 being the ultimate product of these efforts, a 45000 ton vessel. However, the design did not take advantage of the more advanced protection methods used in Littorio’s armoring (such as the composite belt). Ultimately, as war came ever closer, despite the effort made to upgrade the Navy’s facilities to build and operate these large ships, it was decided to go with a repeat of the Littorio-class for the next battleship order (and thus Impero and Roma were ordered). However, Ansaldo had also sold the design to Russia, as UP.41 – with heavy modification to Russian preferences, and without the Pugliese TDS. This is the project we have data for, but needless to say it varies significantly from any design that would’ve succeeded Littorio. So, stat-wise, that is why I will try to recreate (including a composite belt, to explain the increased thickness). Her name is an interesting leap of logic for me – while personally speaking I’d love to name her Giuseppe Garibaldi, the fact of the matter is that A) by tradition only cruisers bared his name and B) By this period battleships were no longer named after people – that went out with the rise to power of the Fascists. Thus, the names of Italian battleships afterwards usually had to do with the glory of fascism (Littorio), a new Roman Empire (Impero), while Roma had a somewhat less neutral name, being named after the eternal city of Rome itself, although that still had ancient connotations to bit, as Rome always will. However, one of these ships had a name that that did not call back to a long-ago past, or a new fascist age. One ship had a name that simply spoke to Italy, the relatively young nation that existed here and now – the one that actually mattered. This was the Vittorio Veneto, named after the major victory achieved by Italy over Austria in 1918 that brought down the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Such a name was a powerful symbol that spoke more about a modern Italy – the one that mattered – than any name harking to some militaristic past or future that involved the subjugation of foreign nations. The Battle of Vittorio Veneto marked an important moment in Italian history – the final defeat, after hundreds of years of struggle, of the Hapsburg Empire, who had dominated Italy for about half a millennium. The victory not only avenged the defeat at Caporetto a year earlier, but also the centuries of foreign rule suffered by the Italian states. Thus the name I decided to go with was named after an earlier battle, but equally important, fought not long after Caporetto. Fought a little over 100 years ago, the Battle of the Piave River was where Italian troops halted and broke the Austrian offensive after the route at Caporetto. This was done in spite of the fact the Entente powers insist they fall further back, as they did not believe the Piave could be held... But hold it did. The Austrians were beaten back again on the Piave when they attempted their last offensive with a counter-attack launched 100 years ago today, and the utter defeat of this effort marked the first point where the Central Power’s command staff realized the war was beginning to end, despite the triumphs of 1917. Piave, although typically unanimously ignored by histories outside of Italy, stood as an important moment, a 20thcentury Legnano, and because of that I think that such a name is appropriate for Italy’s tier X battleship. Survivability: 49506 tons – 69300 HP Belt: 450mm between end barbettes inclined at 11º with an internal 36mm bulkhead, with a 24mm bulkhead ~4 meters further inside the hull. Main deck is 162mm with a 55mm upper deck. Upper belt is 150mm. Turret Faces are 400mm sloped at 30º Main Armament: 3x3 406mm/56 Ansaldo Modello 1936 (Broadside: 9 guns) RoF: 2.0 rpm (30 sec) Dispersion/Sigma: German, 2.0 Traverse: 6º/sec (30 sec) AP: MV: 850mps Mass/Dmg: 1350 kg (MaxDmg: 14800) SAP: MV: 870mps Mass/Dmg: 1100 kg (MaxDmg: 13500) Secondary Battery: 4x3 152mm/55 OTO Modello 1936 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 5 rpm (12 sec) AP: MV: 910mps Mass/Dmg: 50 kg (MaxDmg: 3100) 12x2 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 (Broadside: 6) RoF: 15 rpm (4.0 sec) HE: MV: 860mps Mass/Dmg: 10.1 kg (MaxDmg: 1300, 5% FC) Anti-Aircraft Battery: 12x2 90mm/50 OTO Modello 1939 - 160.8 dps @ 4.50 km 24x2 37mm/54 Breda 1932 - 378.4 dps @ 3.51 km 4x1 37mm/54 RM 1939 - 35.6 dps @ 3.51 km 24x2 20mm/65 Breda 1935 - 81.6 dps @ 2.01 km Maneuverability: Engine Power: 180000 shp Top Speed: 32.0 knots Alright, so I lied. This is not quite true to BB1936. That design intended to use a 406/50, with characteristics similar to the Russian 406mm/50 B-37, which the Italians helped develop. The planed 406/50 was to extend the given range of penetration compared to the 381/50 gun by 2000 meters – meaning it far exceeded any other gun that actually saw service in raw power. This ship doesn’t use that gun. Instead, this ship uses the monstrous 406mm/56 that was considered for the 4-16/16-40, a monstrous design that was intended to mount sixteenof these guns on a hull with 406mm of steeply inclined hull armor, and a top speed of 29 knots. The gun is your Vittorio Veneto, with the ability to rip through just short of 700mm of armor at 20 km, even the most heavily armored battleships will struggle to protect themselves from these guns, the raw penetrative power of a 1350-kilogram projectile fired at an initial muzzle velocity of 850 meters per second more than making up for the smaller caliber and the low gun count for that caliber. The raw kinetic force behind its armor-piecing gives it as high a damage potential as Yamato’s monstrous 460mm guns, and the SAP as much as American SHS! With the ridiculous velocity retention of such heavy shells, you’ll likely have issues over-penetrating cruisers just with your SAP shells – these might just be a more viable weapon than your AP at closer ranges against battleships! If your offensive armament is your Vittorio Veneto, then your armor is your Piave, because it’s a tough nut to crack. With 450mm of armor inclined at 11º, your belt is essentially 18” before angle of fall is even considered. Such a belt is seriously thick, and you retain the series of internal bulkheads to keep your citadel safe from stray rounds and the like. Angled at 45º, even Yamato’s 460mm APC won’t penetrate the belt by itself beyond 11 km. Your thick main armor deck is highly resistant to AP bombers, while your overall HE protection is improved. With a 55mm upper deck, even German 203mm HE will shatter on it, as will regular HE up to 330mm. IFHE will need to be greater than 254mm to penetrate it, and higher-penetration HE with IFHE will need to be 170mm or greater. Your 150mm upper belt provides significant protection against destroyers and light cruiser AP, and is immune to HE and IFHE of any penetration type. Even your AA protection isn’t terrible, although nor is it fantastic. Adequate is the best way to describe it. And if your armor is your Piave, then your mobility is your Carica della Savoia Cavalleria, because it’s going to get you out of (and into) trouble. Able to make 32 knots, you’re in the fastest tier X battleship, and because of your relatively small size, you’re probably able to turn much better than any other tier X battleship, too, handling more like a tier VIII than anything else. This will combine well with your good stealth. Exploit this brutally. However, that brings us on to the final point, which is your endurance. Watch how far you extend yourself, or it will be your Caporetto. You pack a huge wallop offensively, you’re fast, and you’re well armored, a tough nut to crack. However if that nut is cracked? Well, you’re light, and that means you’ve got a fairly small healthpool. You’re sitting on less than 70000 health at a tier where the lightest competitor has 82900 health, over 10000 more than you. That’s the price you pay for this unusual combination of characteristics. The Line overall So how does the line overall bring something new to WoWs? A good line can’t just be ‘more stuff’. It should bring something new to the table, and ideally do it without relying on a crazy gimmick, such as a super heal or speed boost. Nor should it rely on incredibly unrealistic rebuilding (side glance at Normandie and Lyon), or massive buffs to shell penetration (side glance at French 305 and 340mm guns). The Italian battleships start out being fairly unique from the start. While Napoli is fairly standard for a tier III battleship, SAP rounds aside, Dante Alighieri immediately takes you for something unique – a unique armament layout allowing you to bring twelve powerful 305mm barrels to bear against enemy ships at a tier where most ships can only manage ten barrels at best. Your armor is less than most of your foes, but your speed is better than most. Conte di Cavouris your last dance with a WWI-era battleship, which is a nice development – most nations don’t ditch the WWI battleships until tier VII. She again stresses a powerful broadside, boasting thirteen barrels to a broadside, and very nice firing angles – the lower turrets can traverse ±150º, and the superfiring turrets ±155º - past autobounce angles! The amidships ‘Q’-turret, meanwhile, rotates a full 360º. The armor and speed are hardly spectacular, armor being average to sub-par for the tier, and unlike before, where only the Japanese battlecruisers beat Dante in speed at tier IV – at tier V, Cavour is only about as fast as Iron Duke – well behind Kongo and Cesare, and an appreciable gap between her and König. At tier VI you start to push into the higher-tier face of the Italian battleship line, and playstyle starts to become more unique. Higher speeds with better handling, punchier guns with fast traverse and fairly sneaky for you tier. Your healthpool also starts to look a little short. However, you’re still carting over the poor armor of your predecessor with a citadel a deck over the waterline, and you’re not that fast. Both French tier VI battleships are faster than you, as is Mutsu, and Bayern’s only behind by a knot. However, with speed boost active, only the French battleships are faster than you. Tier VIII battleships will be a major threat given your low health and poor armor, and the fact that many are faster than you. Your AP is punchy, however – you’ve got more penetration than Bayern’s 380mm guns! Use your stealth to get where you need to be, and surprise enemies with powerful AP volleys. You’re probably not going to want to directly fight many other tier VI or VII battleships, but you can certainly hold your own against them. In tier VIII games, play in support of cruisers and destroyers, using your SAP rounds to gut targets most battleships would simply overpenetrate. At tier VII, you’ll be finding yourself having to do something similar, albeit with much, much thicker armor and a full 30 knots – no more speed boost, however! This puts you ahead of most, ultimately – tied only with Ashitaka and 2 knots behind Hood and Gneisenau. With a 2.0 sigma, however, your shells are going to be quite accurate, so good aim will be rewarded. As a famous American admiral said; Hit hard, Hit fast, Hit often. Your guns will be feeling fairly anemic by this point, comparing poorly to the other guns of tier VII battleships, so speed, stealth, and armor must be exploited ruthlessly in order to come out on top. Finally at tier VIII you hit Littorio. With it’s powerful, high-velocity guns and strong belt, those familiar with Roma will be at home, although the Littorio trades TDS for better AA, especially with upgrades adding to light AA. Unlike Roma, while Littorio lacks HE, its SAP rounds help it significantly to aid with one of Roma’s major issues with her main battery – chronic overpenetration of light armor. With still well over 200mm of penetration at 20 km, the 381mm SAP rounds and their shorter fuses make ideal weapons for shots against cruisers, or the upper works of angled battleships, while the AP shells will simply punch through almost any battleship armor one might expect to find in her MM range. At 30 knots you’re in the average for tier VIII battleships, but your handling is still slightly above average for the 30-knot+ club. Tier IX gives you quite a gem. Impero is a capable battleship, using the same guns but with much-improved sigma and a slight RoF boost (to 28 seconds – about the fastest RoF at loading angle the guns achieved that is known of). She’s also 2 knots faster, and has a thicker armor belt – whereas in-game Roma is proof against her guns at 22 km and beyond, Impero is proof at ranges of 18.7 km and beyond – still not quite the 16 km figure the belt was rated at (this would require a 462mm/11º belt), but still quite powerful – a moderate angle of 30º will see you safe from the American 16”/50 Mk.7 at beyond 15 km, and even Yamato’s monster 460mm guns can’t penetrate your belt from outside of 24 km, or about 19 km at a 30º angle. This drops to 13 km at 45º. However, you do pay for this with lower than average health for the tier. Tier X gives you the pinnacle of the line, Piave. This tier X battleship has stupidly strong guns and its main AP rounds may be seldom used due to the ridiculous penetration, able to punch past the belts of even well angled tier X battleships at the range of 20 km. The gun averages 9-10” more penetration at a given range than the vaunted American 16”/50 Mk.7, the most powerful 406mm gun to ever see service. At sub-5 km ranges, this 406mm Palla can penetrate over a meter of armor. Your own armor isn’t too shabby, 450mm of inclined armor, the most powerful belt at tier X. However, you’re light for your tier, and you don’t have the power of overmatch over 30mm+ plating – with only nine guns to boot! Using your stealth, speed, handling, and armor to survive will be vital to success, as otherwise damage will stack up rapidly. Thus while the lower tiers may feel very vanilla – a high gun count, but otherwise a familiar story aside from the lack of HE – the mid and higher tiers adopt their own unique flavor. Mid tiers are more modern and faster than many counterparts, but often just don’t compare in the armor department, and start to look a little underweight. This is somewhat of an experimental version of the tree, but I wanted to try it because I tend to like avoiding paper where possible, and I also though the 406/56 was simply too awesome not to use. So I do acknowledge that the tree does have other options for tier IX & X. For example, Deamon93’s version sees BB1936/UP.41, with the 406/50, at tier IX, with tier X being an unknown – the 4-16/16-40 somewhat being a placeholder due to the fact it would be absurdly overpowered in-game. That being said, there are easily other options if WG fudges it like the last three tier X BBs – a 10-gun BB with either 406mm gun would work well if still fast and well armored, using the iconic gun layout of the Abruzzi-class and the rebuilt battleships. It would also not be unrealistic to see on a modern Italian battleship – at one point this familiar layout was considered for Littorio in order to equally divide firepower fore and aft. Obviously, that route was not taken, due to weight concerns. Likewise, I should point out – the weight for many of the SAP rounds are guesstimated. I only have data for the 320mm and 381mm Granata Perforante, so I could only guess based on those shells for those that equip other guns. So, what do you guys think? As always, constructive criticism is welcome (and I'm sure I'll hear it on the tier X...). Happy Hunting!
  5. I understand there's a lot of these ideas out ranging from an entirely different line from tier 3 to 10; however. Doing this makes it, no longer a split it would now be an entirely different line. What I propose is a split, starting at tier 5. AA armaments can be installed through a series of hypothetical loadouts. Tier 5: (Constructed design) Nevada Armament: 10-14 inch (356 mm) guns, (Original configuration) 21-5 inch (127mm )guns, (1930 refit), 12-5 inch guns, (1942 refit) 16-5 inch guns. Armour: 14 inch belt (13.5 to be exact) Speed: 21 knots Tier 6: (constructed design) Pennsylvania Armament: 12-14 (356 mm) inch guns, 22-5 inch (127 mm) guns, (1930 refit) 16-5 inch guns Armor: 14 inch armor belt, (13.5 inches exact) Speed: 21 knots Tier 7: (Paper design, though based on a constructed design) Proposal 40, Design 1913 Preliminary design of the Colorado (I understand I'm going to get a lot of fire, for having a paper design. I'm not going to use a Tennessee because I already have a 12-14 inch armed battleship at tier 6, no need to have another) (with hypothetical AA loadouts) Armament: 8-16 inch (406 mm) guns ,20-6 inch (152 mm) guns, (if given a 1940 hypothetical refit, would probably be given 16- 6 inch guns (most likely DP guns, dual purpose). Armor: 14 inch belt, (13.5 inches exact) Speed: 21 knots Tier 8: (Constructed Desgin) South Dakota The South Dakota was armed with 16-5 inch guns, instead of 20 unlike the rest of the class Armament: 9-16 inch guns (406 mm), 16-5 inch guns (127 mm) Armor: 12 inch belt (This is supposed to have more extensive protection than the North Carolina) speed: 28 knots Tier 9 (paper design) Tillman 3 or South Dakota (1920's) Either of these two designs could work as they both have similar armaments and protection. The armament shown here would be the top configuration for either one of them. (this would also have to be a hypothetical modern design. Armament: 12-16 inch guns (406 mm), 20-6 inch (152 mm) guns Armor: 14 inch belt (13.5 inch belt, exactly) Speed: (Tillman 3) 30 knots, (South Dakota 1920's) 23 knots) Tier 10 (Paper design) Tillman 1 The original Tillman 1 called for 21-5 inch guns, but the proportions I have will be only 20 guns and they will all be 6 inch guns DP. Since this is a Tillman its not entirely out of the question that it would be armed with 6 inch guns. This is going to be a hypothetical modern design. Note: that the main guns would be the Montana's MK 7s, so they would be equipped with the super-heavy type shells. Also, the secondary armament would be the Worcester's guns, as those are 6 inch and they are duel purpose. Armament: 12-16 inch guns (406 mm), 20-6 inch (152 mm) guns. Armor: 18 inch belt Speed: 26.5 knots (This could be increased to 27 knots, since it would be 27 knots if rounded.) I know I used paper designs but, reason for this is because I feel having 2 ships with 14 inch guns with the same number of them at tiers 6 and 7 is just I will get pictures up later Alright here's a premium suggested by someone else here. Premium Tier 8 (Paper design, though based on constructed one) Proposal 167B, Design 1917 This was a preliminary design of the Colorado, of course though 8-16 inch gun armament was selected over this one. (Note: the original design actually calls for 22-5 inch guns all in casemates, I've altered the original design to include 20-5 inch 38s there going to be in duel mounts DP. So, I added the letter B to represent the alterations done to the original design.) This is going to be a hypothetical modern design and like the rest of the line, its a secondary focused tanky line, main downside about this ship compared to the other U.S tier 8 premiums is that its slower. The armor scheme will be similer to Arizona with a turtle backed styled armor (well sort of ) Armament: 10-16 inch (406 mm) guns, (all duel turrets), 20-5 inch guns (127 mm, same guns as the Iowa and Georgia). Armor: 14 inch belt (13.5 inches to be exact) Speed: 21 knots Here are the photos, from tiers 5-10 then premium. Note: I selected the photo of the South Dakota 1920s, since both desgins are very similer to each other I chose the Tillman 3 to represent both of the two options I selected for the 9 position (just so there wont be a lot of photos discombobulating everything)
  6. IndexStart and stop times Earning Royal Tokens (Directives, Daily Chains, & Daily Shipments) Spending Royal Tokens (Cmdr, dubs, premium time, flags, camo, & credits) UK CA London and UK CA Cheshire premium ships and the UK CA (heavy cruiser) Tech Tree released Random Token Bundles for Doubloons Updates to Normal Upgrades Start and stop times. Patch 9.1 is scheduled to drop at 8am EST on Wed, Feb 12th. The maintenance window starts at 5am EST. Patch 9.1 is expected to end at 5am EST on Wed, Mar 11th when the maintenance window for 9.2 starts. A new Directive starts each week and ALL Directives end at 2am PST Mon, Mar 9th, so plan on being done by end of day on Sun, Mar 8th. Directive I starts with the patch drop, likely 8am EST, Wed Feb 12th. Directive II starts 5am EST, Mon Feb 17th. Directive III starts 5am EST, Mon Feb 24th. Directive IV starts 5am EST, Mon Mar 2nd. You must complete Dir I, before you can start on Dir II, even if Dir II has started. Daily Chains will have Royal Tokens starting 5am EST, Thu, Feb 13th and will end at 2am PST Mon, Mar 9th. So 25 days from Feb 13th to Mar 8th is the 20 per day between the two Daily Chains for the total of 500 Tokens. Daily Shipments will start at 8am Wed, Feb 12th and end at 2am PST Wed, Feb 26th. So the last day to collect a Daily Shipment is Tue, Feb 25th. To collect all 10 rewards, you have to start collecting by Sun, Feb 16th. Daily Challenge will have Royal Tokens for victories with 3 specific UK CAs starting 5am EST, Wed, Feb 12th and will end at 2am PST Wed, Mar 11th. So 28 days from Feb 12th to Mar 10th is the 10 per day that you can get for a total of 280 Royal Tokens. Earning Royal Tokens (1,380 total available, but only 1,100 total available if you do not have T8 Albemarle tech tree ship and/or the T6 London premium ship) You will be able to earn Royal Tokens in the Directives, Daily Chains, Daily Challenges and Daily Shipments only during 9.1. You will be able to spend the Tokens in Armory from 9.1 through 9.2. When 9.3 drops they will be converted to credits. So 9.3 is scheduled for Wed, Apr 8th currently and Royal Tokens will be converted at the rate of 1 for 9,000 credits when that patch drops. Directives (550 total Royal Tokens) There will be 4 Directives with one coming out each week. Each Directive will likely have 8-10 Missions (36 total) and you will likely need to complete 5-7 Missions to complete a Directive. There will be 550 Royal Tokens in the Directives. Note the underlined sentence in the screenshot below. It probably means that the Missions to complete each Directive may have Nation, Ship Type, and/or Tier restrictions to complete the mission. So do not be surprised if you get a mission for torp hits on DDs by one particular nation, secondary hits by BBs of a particular nation, bomb hits by a carrier of a particular nation, or something else similar. Those with fleets of a few to one nations and/or ship types may have problems completing Missions for the Directives. We will not find out the Mission details until the patch drops on Wed, Feb 12th. A new Directive starts each week and ALL Directives end at 2am PST Mon, Mar 9th. Directive I starts with the patch drop, 8am EST, Wed Feb 12th. Complete 4 of the 9 Missions to complete the Directive and the reward is 100 Royal Tokens. Directive II starts 5am EST, Mon Feb 17th. Complete 4 of the 9 Missions to complete the Directive and the reward is 150 Royal Tokens. Directive III starts 5am EST, Mon Feb 24th. Complete 4 of the 9 Missions to complete the Directive and the reward is 150 Royal Tokens. Directive IV starts 5am EST, Mon Mar 2nd. Complete 4 of the 9 Missions to complete the Directive and the reward is 150 Royal Tokens, the T6 premium ship London, a Victorian White perma-camo for London, a port slot, and a 3 pt Cmdr. You must complete Dir I, before you can start on Dir II, even if Dir II has started. Daily Chains (500 total Royal Tokens) The Daily Chains from Thu, Feb 13th through Wed, Mar 9th will have a TOTAL of 500 Royal Tokens. That is 25 days of Daily Chains with 20 Royal Tokens per day which would be 10 per Daily Chain that day. We do not know if you get Tokens for each task in the chain or only for completing each of the two chains. We will get that detail on Thu, Feb 13th. You get 2 Royal Tokens for each stage and 4 Royal Tokens for completing a Daily Chain. So each Chain is 10 Tokens and both in a day are 20 Tokens. Daily Shipments (50 total Royal Tokens) The Daily shipments run from Wed, Feb 12th through Tue, Feb 25th. If you want to collect all the Daily Shipment, you have to start by Sun, Feb 16th at the latest. To collect a Daily Shipment, you need to log into the game and go to the Daily Shipments tab to click and collect your Shipment for that day. You can set the Shipments tab to come up automatically when you log into the game in the Shipment tab. Shipments Rewards are below. 1st - 3x Union Jack one-use camouflages 2nd - 50,000 credits 3rd - 10 Royal Tokens 4th - 3x Union Jack one-use camouflages 5th - 50,000 credits 6th - 10 Royal Tokens 7th - 1 day of Warships Premium Account 8th - 10 Royal Tokens 9th - 50 doubloons 10th - 20 Royal Tokens You can buy Royal Tokens in the Random Bundles that will be in the Armory for 9.1 and 9.2 patches. See the dedicated Random Bundles section below. Daily Challenges (280 total Royal Tokens) There will be Daily Challenges (2nd option under the Combat Missions tab in port) for the T8 CA Ablemarle tech tree ship, T8 CA Cheshire premium ship (end of Feb release) and T6 CA London premium ship (likely patch day release). You can get up to 10 Tokens per day for a victory in those those 3 ships (not each ship). So 10 Royal Tokens for one victory in one of those ships. The T6 London will likely cost between $20 and $24 for the ship itself and there will almost certainly be bigger bundles of stuff available. The T8 Cheshire will likely cost between $44 and $48 for the ship itself and there will almost certainly be bigger bundles of stuff available. The T8 Ablemarle will change from early access to Tech Tree ship this patch. So you will be able to grind it like any other tech tree ship after the patch drops on Wed, Feb 12th. Spending Royal Tokens NOTE: IF you want to get the UK Cmdr Andrew Cunningham for Royal Tokens, he will cost 1,000 of the 'free' total of 1,380 Royal Tokens. So hoard your Tokens if you want the Cmdr. He will come back in the Armory for coal in patch 9.7, which is likely late July to Aug as a SWAG. You will need to complete ALL 4 Directives and get most of the Daily Chains to get the 1,000 Royal Tokens you will need. There will be Random Bundles you can buy for doubloons that will have camo, flags and Royal Tokens, see more below in that dedicated section. You can spend Royal Tokens in patches 9.1 and 9.2, but can only earn 'free' Royal Tokens in patch 9.1. In patch 9.2, you will still be able to buy the Random Bundles for doubloons that will have Royal Tokens. The time to spend Royal Tokens is scheduled to be from Wed, Feb 12th to likely Wed, Apr 8th. When patch 9.3 drops, on what is scheduled to be Wed, Apr 8th, any left over Royal Tokens will be converted to credits at the rate of 1 to 9,000 credits.  The big item to spend Royal Tokens on is the UK Cmdr Andrew Cunningham who will have the following special bonuses and talents. You can buy the following with Royal Tokens in the Armory from Wed, Feb 12th to very early morning likely Wed, Apr 8th: 1,000 Royal Tokens = UK Cmdr Andrew Cunningham 140 Royal Tokens = 200 Doubloons 70 Royal Tokens = 1 day WoWs premium time 50 Royal Tokens = 450,000 credits (NOTE: this is the same as waiting for them to be converted on Apr 8th.) 10 Royal Tokens = 1 Union Jack one-use camouflages 84 Royal Tokens = 10 Victor Lima signal flags (+0.5/1% causing fire bonus and +4% causing flooding bonus) 40 Royal Tokens = 10 Sierra Mike signal flags (+5% to ship's max speed) 40 Royal Tokens = 10 India Delta signal flags (+20% to the amount of HP recoved from Repair Party) 32 Royal Tokens = 10 India Yankee signal flags (-20% to fire duration) 32 Royal Tokens = 10 Juliet Charlie signal flags (-100% detonation chance, still 0% if you mount flags with a det chance) 32 Royal Tokens = 10 November Foxtrot signal flags (-5% reload on comsumables, stacks with Jack of All Trades) UK Premium ships and Tech Tree ships The UK CA London will be the reward for completing the 4th Directive in patch 9.1. The premium ship will come with a port slot, Victorian White perma-camo, and a 3pt Cmdr. It may or may not have the Type 10 premium ship perma-camo and my guess is that it will not get that normal perma-camo. You will need to complete the 4th Directive by 2am PST Mon, Mar 9th, so plan on being done by the EOD Sun, Mar 8th. If you buy the premium ship before earning it, you will get doubloon compensation, but the amount has yet to be disclosed. A guess would be 4,850 to 5,800 doubloons, but this is only a guess. The T6 London will likely go on sale in the premium shop on Wed, Feb 12th for around $20 and $24 for the ship itself and there will almost certainly be bigger bundles of stuff available. London leaves the premium shop at 2am PST Friday, March 13th. So if you want to purchase it, buy it by EOD on Thursday, March 12th. The T8 Cheshire will go on sale in late Feb and likely cost between $44 and $48 for the ship itself and there will almost certainly be bigger bundles of stuff available. Cheshire is on sale as of February 28th and leaves the premium shop at 2am PST Friday, March 13th. So if you want to purchase it, buy it by EOD on Thursday, March 12th. $45.20 for the ship, $78 for the mid-bundle, and $90 for the big bundle. UK CA Tech Tree ships The Early Access T5 Hawkins, T6 Devonshire, T7 Surrey, and T8 Albemarle will become tech tree ships as the full UK CA split is dropping. Any Cmdrs NOT trained for the early access ships will need to undergo training once the ships are tech tree ships, like normal tech tree ships. The UK CA line will branch off of the Emerald or Danae CL and run to the T10 Goliath. Random Bundles (1,920 total Royal Tokens) There will be Random Bundles you can buy in the Armory for 1,000 doubloons each. There will be 48 total bundles and 6 Bundles in each category. You will be offered one bundle and if you buy it, you will then be offered another bundle. Since there are only 6 Bundles in each category, you can only get a bundle six times. The bundles have 6 Union Jack one-use camos, 6 Draconic signals, 10 combat signals and 40 Royal Tokens. The breakdown is below. 6 Union Jack one-use camos, 6 Dragon signals, 10 Sierra Mike signals, and 40 Royal Tokens 6 Union Jack one-use camos, 6 Wyvern signals, 10 India Yankee signals, and 40 Royal Tokens 6 Union Jack one-use camos, 6 Red Dragon signals, 10 Juliet Charlie signals, and 40 Royal Tokens 6 Union Jack one-use camos, 6 Ouroboros signals, 10 November Foxtrot signals, and 40 Royal Tokens 6 Union Jack one-use camos, 6 Hydra signals, 10 India Delta signals, and 40 Royal Tokens 6 Union Jack one-use camos, 6 Basilisk signals, 10 Victor Lima signals, and 40 Royal Tokens 6 Union Jack one-use camos, 6 Scylla signals, 10 Mike Yankee Soxisix signals, and 40 Royal Tokens 6 Union Jack one-use camos, 6 Leviathan signals, 10 November Echo Setteseven signals, and 40 Royal Tokens https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Flags Updates to Upgrades Normal upgrades in slots 2 through 5 are being changed and added to. Here are the details. Free demounting of modules until very early morning Thu, Feb 20th, so make sure to get all your upgrades set by EOD on Wed, Feb 19th. Articles referenced British Cruisers: Obtain Cruiser London https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/game-updates/british-cruisers-london/ Patch Notes: https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/game-updates/update-091-british-cruisers-part2/ Premium shop: https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/sales-and-events/premium-shop-091/ Edits 0837 Tue, Feb 11th added Upgrades section Wed, Feb 12th Directives, Daily Challenges, etc. Multiple updates today 1010 Thu, Feb 13th Daily Chains and free module demount time 1306 Fri, Feb 28th premium ships
  7. French CV Line I am proposing new French ships for the game, which would be French CVs. Here are the following choices. National flavor: Slow, but powerful torpedoes and high explosive bombs. Squadrons will be 4 or 6 aircraft for torpedoes: 2 release, 5 for bombs: all release, 6 for rockets, 3 release. Tier IV Béarn Rocket: Dewoitine D.373 Torpedo: Levasseur PL.7 Bomb: Levasseur PL.10 Tier VI Bois Belleau Rocket: A; Dewoitine D.500 B; Grumman F6F Torpedo: A; Bréguet 19 B; Grumman TBF Bomb: A; Curtiss SBC B; Douglas SBD Tier VIII Joffre Rocket: A; Grumman F6F B; Vought F4U Torpedo: A; Grumman TBF B; Curtiss 2B2C Bomb: A; Douglas SBD B; Curtiss 2B2C Tier X Arromanches Rocket: A; Supermarine Seafire B; Bréguet 1050 Torpedo: Curtiss 2B2C B; Bréguet 1050 Bomb: A; Curtiss 2B2C B; Bréguet 1050 Tier IV Premium Commandant Teste Please tell me any suggestions or concerns, thank you! :D
  8. I think the current layout of the Tech Tree needs some work. With the past, current and future line splits, the trees of some nations are getting fatter and some ships on the far right are getting cutoff (at least on my screen). It would be nice to prune the ships displayed to just CAs/CLs, DDs, BBs, etc. We have such filters in the Armory, can we please get them in the Tech Tree as well? Thanks...
  9. New: -Added USS Tillman as a tier 9 premium Battleship -Line 3! (Updated) -Added New South Dakota Hull A Index: -Line 2 -Premiums -Line 3 There are many US Battleships that people have wanted in game for as long as the game has been released. From the Lexington class Battlecruiser's to the Tillman. This post focuses on new US Battleship lines that could be added into the game. This post was originally just a proposal for a second US Battleship tech tree, but many ships have been requested to me, so with many new upcoming additions to this post (coming soon), this post is dedicated to the US Battleships. Enjoy! Tier 3: USS Delaware (BB-28) The Delaware-class battleships of the United States Navy were the second class of American dreadnoughts. With this class, the 16,000 long tons (16,257 t) limit imposed on capital ships by the United States Congress was waived, which allowed designers at the Navy's Bureau of Construction and Repair to correct what they considered flaws in the preceding South Carolina class and produce ships not only more powerful but also more effective and rounded overall. Launched in 1909, these ships became the first in US naval history to exceed 20,000 long tons (20,321 t). The Delawares carried a battery of ten 12-inch (305 mm) guns in five turrets, an increase of two guns over the South Carolinas. With these ships, the US Navy re-adopted a full-fledged medium-caliber weapon for anti-torpedo boat defense. While the 5-inch (127 mm) gun was smaller than that used by other major navies, this would, with few exceptions, become the standard medium-gun caliber for the US Navy for the better part of the 20th century. As for speed, the Delawares were capable of 21 kn (24 mph; 39 km/h), a significant improvement over the earlier class's 18.5 kn (21 mph; 34 km/h). This would become the speed for all American standard-type battleships. Propulsion systems were mixed; while North Dakota was fitted with steam turbines, Delaware retained triple-expansion engines. Turbines were much less fuel-efficient, a significant concern for a Navy with Pacific responsibilities but lacking Britain's extensive network of coaling stations. These ships saw varied service during their careers. During World War I, Delaware was part of Battleship Division Nine of the US Atlantic Fleet, and was assigned to the British Grand Fleet. She escorted convoys and participated in the blockade of the German High Seas Fleet. In contrast, North Dakota remained on the American coast throughout the war, due in part to worries about her troublesome turbine engines. Post-war, they conducted training cruises with the US Atlantic Fleet. In 1924, Delaware was broken up for scrap metal in accordance with the Washington Naval Treaty of 1922. North Dakota survived until 1931, when she too was scrapped, under the terms of the 1930 London Naval Treaty. The two Delaware-class battleships were ordered in response to the British battleship HMS Dreadnought, the first all-big-gun battleship to enter service. The previous American dreadnoughts, the South Carolina class, had been designed before the particulars of HMS Dreadnought were known. The Navy decided that another pair of battleships should be built to counter the perceived superiority of Dreadnought over South Carolina, and so Rear Admiral Washington L. Capps prepared a design for a ship with an additional main battery gun turret to match Dreadnought's ten guns. But unlike Dreadnought, all ten of Delaware's guns could fire on the broadside. At the time of her construction, Delaware was the largest and most powerful battleship then building in the world. Delaware was 518 ft 9 in (158 m) long overall and had a beam of 85 ft 3 in (26 m) and a draft of 27 ft 3 in (8 m). She displaced 20,380 long tons (20,707 t) as designed and up to 22,400 long tons (22,759 t) at full load. Her bow had an early example of bulbous forefoot. She had a crew of 933 officers and men. The ship was powered by two-shaft vertical triple-expansion engines rated at 25,000 shp (18,642 kW) and fourteen coal-fired Babcock & Wilcox boilers, generating a top speed of 21 kn (24 mph; 39 km/h). The ship had a cruising range of 6,000 nmi (11,000 km; 6,900 mi) at a speed of 10 kn (12 mph; 19 km/h). Also, because Delaware's engine bearings were equipped with forced lubrication instead of a gravity-fed system, she was the first American battleship capable of steaming at full speed for 24 hours without any need for engine repair. The ship was armed with a main battery of ten 12-inch/45 caliber Mark 5 guns in five twin Mark 7 gun turrets on the centerline, two of which were placed in a superfiring pair forward. The other three turrets were placed aft of the superstructure. The secondary battery consisted of 14 5-inch (127 mm)/50 caliber Mark 6 guns mounted on Mark 9 and Mark 12 pedestal mounts in casemates along the side of the hull. As was standard for capital ships of the period, she carried a pair of 21-inch (533 mm) torpedo tubes, submerged in her hull on the broadside. Delaware's main armored belt was 11 in (279 mm) thick, while the armored deck was 2 in (51 mm) thick. The gun turrets had 12 in (305 mm) thick faces and the conning tower had 11.5 in (292 mm) thick sides. Hull A: Hull B: Tier 4: USS Florida (BB-30) The Florida-class battleships of the United States Navy comprised two ships: Florida and Utah. Launched in 1910 and 1909 respectively and commissioned in 1911, they were slightly larger than the preceding Delaware class design but were otherwise very similar. This was the first US battleship class in which all ships received steam turbine engines. In the previous Delaware-class, North Dakota received steam turbine propulsion as an experiment while Delaware retained triple-expansion engines. Both ships were involved in the 1914 Second Battle of Vera Cruz, deploying their Marine contingents as part of the operation. Following the entrance of the United States into World War I in 1917, both ships were deployed to Europe. Florida was assigned to the British Grand Fleet and based in Scapa Flow; in December 1918 she escorted President Woodrow Wilson to France for the peace negotiations. Utah was assigned to convoy escort duty; she was based in Ireland and was tasked with protecting convoys as they approached the European continent. Retained under the Washington Naval Treaty of 1922, both ships were modernized significantly, with torpedo bulges and oil-fired boilers installed and other improvements made, but were demilitarized under terms of the 1930 London Naval Treaty. Florida was scrapped, Utah converted into first a radio-controlled target ship, then an anti-aircraft gunnery trainer. She served in the latter role until sunk by the Japanese during the attack on Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941. Her hull, never raised, remains on the bottom of the harbor as a war memorial. Florida was 521 ft 6 in (158.95 m) long overall and had a beam of 88 ft 3 in (26.90 m) and a draft of 28 ft 6 in (8.69 m). She displaced 21,825 long tons (22,175 t) as designed and up to 23,033 long tons (23,403 t) at full load. The ship was powered by four-shaft Parsons steam turbines rated at 28,000 shp (20,880 kW) and twelve coal-fired Babcock & Wilcox boilers, generating a top speed of 20.75 kn (38.43 km/h; 23.88 mph). The ship had a cruising range of 5,776 nmi (6,650 mi; 10,700 km) at a speed of 10 kn (19 km/h; 12 mph). She had a crew of 1,001 officers and men. The ship was armed with a main battery of ten 12-inch (305 mm)/45 caliber Mark 5 guns in five twin Mark 8 gun turrets on the centerline, two of which were placed in a superfiring pair forward. The other three turrets were placed aft of the superstructure. The secondary battery consisted of sixteen 5-inch (127 mm)/51 caliber guns mounted in casemates along the side of the hull. As was standard for capital ships of the period, she carried a pair of 21-inch (533 mm) torpedo tubes, submerged in her hull on the broadside. Florida's main armored belt was 11 in (279 mm) thick, while the armored deck was 1.5 in (38 mm) thick. The gun turrets had 12 in (305 mm) thick faces and the conning tower had 11.5 in (292 mm) thick sides. Hull A: Hull B: Hull C: Tier 5: USS Nevada (BB-39) The Nevada class comprised two dreadnought battleships—Nevada and Oklahoma—built for the United States Navy in the 1910s. They were significant developments in battleship design, being the first in the world to adopt "all or nothing" armor, a major step forward in armor protection because it emphasized protection optimized for long-range engagements before the Battle of Jutland demonstrated the need for such a layout. They also introduced three-gun turrets and oil-fired water-tube boilers to the US fleet. The two Nevadas were the progenitors of the Standard-type battleship, a group that included the next four classes of broadly similar battleships that were intended to be tactically homogeneous. Nevada and Oklahoma deployed to Ireland in 1918 to escort convoys during World War I but saw no action. After the war, they were transferred to the Pacific Fleet, where they spent most of the 1920s and 1930s. During this period, they conducted extensive training operations and made several long-distance cruises, including to Australia and New Zealand in 1925 and Oklahoma's voyage to Europe in 1936. Both vessels were extensively modernized between 1927 and 1930, having their armament improved, protection scheme strengthened, and new boilers installed. They were moored in Battleship Row in Pearl Harbor when the Japanese attacked on 7 December 1941; Oklahoma was sunk in the attack while Nevada was able to get underway before being forced to ground herself to avoid sinking in deeper water. Only Nevada was salvageable, and she was repaired and modernized by mid-1943 when she joined the Aleutian Islands campaign. She then supported the Normandy landings in June 1944 and Operation Dragoon in August before returning to the Pacific in time for the Battle of Iwo Jima in February 1945, followed by the Battle of Okinawa from March to June. Worn out by the end of the war, she was allocated to Operation Crossroads in late 1945 for use in the nuclear weapons tests in mid-1946. She survived both of the Crossroads blasts and was ultimately sunk with conventional weapons off Hawaii in 1948. Oklahoma, meanwhile, was raised over the course of 1943, partially dismantled in 1944, and was sold to ship breakers in 1946; while under tow to San Francisco in May 1947, she became separated from the vessel towing her and foundered. As the first second-generation battleship in the US Navy, Nevada has been described as "revolutionary" and "as radical as Dreadnought was in her day" by present-day historians. At the time of its completion in 1916, The New York Times remarked that the new warship was "the greatest battleship afloat" because it was so much larger than other contemporary American battleships: its tonnage was nearly three times that of the obsolete 1890 pre-dreadnought Oregon, almost twice that of the 1904 battleship Connecticut, and almost 8,000 long tons (8,100 t) greater than that of one of the first American dreadnoughts, Delaware—built just seven years prior to Nevada. Nevada was the first battleship in the US Navy to have triple gun turrets, a single funnel, and an oil-fired steam power plant. In particular, the use of the more-efficient oil gave the ship an advantage over earlier coal-fired plants. Nevada was also the first US battleship with geared turbines, which also helped increase fuel economy and thus range compared to earlier direct drive turbines. The ability to steam great distances without refueling was a major concern of the General Board at that time. In 1903, the Board felt all American battleships should have a minimum steaming radius of 6,000 nmi (11,000 km) so that the US could enforce the Monroe Doctrine. One of the main purposes of the Great White Fleet, which sailed around the world in 1907–1908, was to prove to Japan that the US Navy could "carry any naval conflict into Japanese home waters". Possibly as a result of this, battleships after 1908 were mainly designed to "steam 8,000 miles at cruising speeds"; given the distance between San Pedro, where the fleet would be based, and Manila, where the Fleet was expected to have to fight under War Plan Orange, was 6,550 nmi (7,540 mi; 12,130 km), endurance was obviously a major concern for the U.S. Navy. Also, oil allowed for the boiler-room crew to be reduced – the engineer on Delaware estimated that 100 firemen (stokers) and 112 coal passers could be adequately replaced by just 24 men, which would allow some crew's quarters to be eliminated; this would save weight and also reduce the amount of fresh water and provisions that the ship would have to carry. In addition to all of this, Nevada had maximum armor over critical areas, such as the magazines and engines, and none over less important places, even though previous battleships had armor of varying thickness depending on the importance of the area it was protecting. This radical change became known as the "all or nothing" principle, which most major navies later adopted for their own battleships. With this new armor scheme, the armor on the battleship was increased to 41.1% of the displacement. As a result of all of these design modifications from previous battleships, Nevada was the first of the US Navy's "Standard" type battleships. "Standards" were characterized by the use of oil fuel, the "all or nothing" armor scheme, and the arrangement of the main armament in four triple or twin turrets without any turrets located in the middle of the ship. The Navy was to create a fleet of modern battleships similar in long-range gunnery, speed, turning radius, and protection. Nevada was followed by 11 other battleships of this type, although significant improvements were made in subsequent designs as naval technology rapidly progressed. An additional seven standard type battleships (USS Washington (BB-47) and the six of the South Dakota class) were never completed due to the Washington Naval Treaty. The two battleships of the Nevada-class were virtually identical except in their propulsion. Nevada and her sister were fitted with different engines to compare the two, putting them 'head-to-head': Oklahoma received older vertical triple expansion engines, which had proven more fuel-efficient and reliable than the direct drive turbines of some earlier battleships, while Nevada received geared Curtis steam turbines. Hull A: Hull B: Tier 6: USS Pennsylvania (BB-38) The Pennsylvania-class consisted of two super-dreadnought battleships built for the United States Navy just before the First World War. The ships were named Pennsylvania and Arizona, after the American states of the same names. They constituted the United States' second battleship design to adhere to the "all or nothing" armor scheme, and were the newest American capital ships when the United States entered the First World War. The Nevada-class battleships represented a marked increase in the United States' dreadnought technology, and the Pennsylvania-class was intended to continue this with slight increases in the ships' capabilities, including two additional 14-inch (356 mm)/45 caliber guns and improved underwater protection. The class was the second standard type battleship class to join the US Navy, along with the preceding Nevada and the succeeding New Mexico, Tennessee and Colorado classes. In service, the Pennsylvania-class saw limited use in the First World War, as a shortage of oil fuel in the United Kingdom meant that only the coal-burning ships of Battleship Division Nine were sent. Both were sent across the Atlantic to France after the war for the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, and were then transferred to the Pacific Fleet before being significantly modernized from 1929 to 1931. For the remainder of the inter-war period, the ships were used in exercises and fleet problems. Both Pennsylvania and Arizona were present during the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, which brought the United States into the Second World War. Arizona was sunk by a massive magazine explosion and was turned into a memorial after the war, while Pennsylvania, in dry dock at the time, received only minor damage. After a refit from October 1942 to February 1943, Pennsylvania went on to serve as a shore bombardment ship for most of the remainder of the war. Pennsylvania was present at the Battle of Surigao Strait, the last battle ever between battleships, but did not engage. Pennsylvania was severely damaged by a torpedo on 12 August 1945, two days before the cessation of hostilities. With minimal repairs, it was used in Operation Crossroads, part of the nuclear testing at Bikini Atoll, before being expended as a target ship in 1948. The General Board's call for a new 1913 fiscal year battleship design was sent in June 1911 with the recent Nevada innovations in mind. They desired a ship with a main battery of twelve 14-inch guns in triple turrets, a secondary battery of twenty-two 5-inch (127 mm) guns, a speed of 21 knots (39 km/h; 24 mph), and armor equivalent to that of the Nevadas. C&R's first sketch was unsatisfactory; their lengthy design of 625 feet (191 m) and 30,000 long tons (30,481 t) actually had less armor than the Nevadas, with a 12.5-inch (320 mm) belt. The design process was marked by various efforts to meet the General Board's specifications with only a moderate increase in tonnage over the Nevada-class. Between January and March 1912, thirteen sketches were prepared for consideration by C&R with reciprocating or turbine engines that traded either speed or metacentric height for armor. Some later designs gave up a half knot of speed to free up about 500 long tons (508 t), enough to thicken the belt from 13.5 to 15 inches (343 to 381 mm) and the barbettes to 14 inches. The choice between double or triple turrets was also still an issue, as the Nevada-class had not been completed yet. The Bureau of Ordnance was in favor of waiting for test results, rather than risking reverting to two-gun 14-inch turrets or moving up to two-gun 16-inch turrets. In March 1912, C&R proposed their seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth designs to the General Board for approval. The eighth and ninth designs were the ones to give up a half knot of speed, while the tenth was a design with four triple turrets and 1,200 long tons (1,200 t) lighter than the Nevada-class ships. In April, the General Board chose the seventh design, which satisfied all of their requirements, albeit on the largest displacement, 31,300 long tons (31,800 t). The length was fixed at 630 feet (190 m), the beam at 93 feet (28 m), and the draft at 28.5 feet (8.7 m). Steam turbines gave the design 30,500 shaft horsepower (22,700 kW) and 21 knots, while the main armor belt was 13.5 inches tapering to 8 inches (203 mm) at the ends. This design was further refined and emerged in a completed state in September. The delay was partially due to tests on the proposed armor, which were completed in June 1912 and resulted in significant alterations to the Pennsylvania-class' underwater protection. Hull A: Hull B: Hull C: Tier 7: USS Tennessee (BB-43) USS Tennessee (BB-43) was the lead ship of the Tennessee class of dreadnought battleships built for the United States Navy in the 1910s. The Tennessee class was part of the standard series of twelve battleships built in the 1910s and 1920s, and were developments of the preceding New Mexico class. They were armed with a battery of twelve 14-inch (360 mm) guns in four three-gun turrets. Tennessee served in the Pacific Fleet for duration of her peacetime career. She spent the 1920s and 1930s participating in routine fleet training exercises, including the annual Fleet Problems, and cruises around the Americas and further abroad, such as a goodwill visit to Australia and New Zealand in 1925. Tennessee was moored in Battleship Row when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941, which brought the United States into World War II. She was not seriously damaged, and after being repaired she operated off the West Coast of the US in 1942. In 1943, Tennessee and many of the older battleships were thoroughly rebuilt to prepare them for operations in the Pacific War and in June–August, she took part in the Aleutian Islands Campaign, providing gunfire support to troops fighting to retake the islands. The Gilbert and Marshall Islands campaign followed from November 1943 to February 1944, including the Battles of Tarawa, Kwajalein, and Eniwetok. In March, she raided Kavieng to distract Japanese forces during the landing on Emirau, and from June through September, she fought in the Mariana and Palau Islands campaign, bombarding Japanese forces during the Battles of Saipan, Guam, Tinian, and Anguar. The Philippines campaign followed in September, during which the ship operated as part of the bombardment group at the Battle of Leyte. The Japanese launched a major naval counterattack that resulted in the Battle of Leyte Gulf, a series of four naval engagements. During the Battle of Surigao Strait, Tennessee formed part of the US line of battle that defeated a Japanese squadron; this was the last battleship engagement in history. Tennessee shelled Japanese forces during the Battle of Iwo Jima in February 1945 and the Battle of Okinawa from March to June. During the latter action, she was hit by a kamikaze but was not seriously damaged. In the final months of the war, she operated primarily in the East China Sea, and after Japan's surrender in August, she participated in the occupation of Japan before returning to the US late in the year. In the postwar draw down of naval forces, Tennessee was placed in the reserve fleet in 1946 and retained, out of service, until 1959, when the Navy decided to discard her. The ship was sold to Bethlehem Steel in July and broken up for scrap. The two Tennessee-class battleships were authorized on 3 March 1915, and they were in most respects repeats of the earlier New Mexico-class battleships, the primary differences being enlarged bridges, greater elevation for the main battery turrets, and relocation of the secondary battery to the upper deck. Tennessee was 624 feet (190 m) long overall and had a beam of 97 ft 5 in (29.69 m) and a draft of 30 ft 2 in (9.19 m). She displaced 32,300 long tons (32,818 t) as designed and up to 33,190 long tons (33,723 t) at full combat load. The ship was powered by four-shaft General Electric turbo-electric transmission and eight oil-fired Babcock & Wilcox boilers rated at 26,800 shaft horsepower (20,000 kW), generating a top speed of 21 knots (39 km/h; 24 mph). The ship had a cruising range of 8,000 nautical miles (15,000 km; 9,200 mi) at a speed of 10 kn (19 km/h; 12 mph). Her crew numbered 57 officers and 1,026 enlisted men. As built, she was fitted with two lattice masts with spotting tops for the main gun battery. The ship was armed with a main battery of twelve 14-inch (356 mm)/50 caliber guns in four, three-gun turrets on the centerline, placed in two superfiring pairs forward and aft of the superstructure. Unlike earlier American battleships with triple turrets, these mounts allowed each barrel to elevate independently. Since Tennessee had been completed after the Battle of Jutland, which demonstrated the value of very long-range fire, her main battery turrets were modified while still under construction to allow elevation to 30 degrees. The secondary battery consisted of fourteen 5-inch (127 mm)/51 caliber guns mounted in individual casemates clustered in the superstructure amidships. Initially, the ship was to have been fitted with twenty-two of the guns, but experiences in the North Sea during World War I demonstrated that the additional guns, which would have been placed in the hull, would have been unusable in anything but calm seas. As a result, the casemates were plated over to prevent flooding. The secondary battery was augmented with four 3-inch (76 mm)/50 caliber guns. In addition to her gun armament, Tennessee was also fitted with two 21-inch (533 mm) torpedo tubes, mounted submerged in the hull, one on each broadside. Tennessee's main armored belt was 8–13.5 in (203–343 mm) thick, while the main armored deck was up to 3.5 in (89 mm) thick. The main battery gun turrets had 18 in (457 mm) thick faces on 13 in (330 mm) barbettes. Her conning tower had 16 in (406 mm) thick sides. Hull A: Hull B: Tier 8: USS South Dakota (BB-57) USS South Dakota (BB-57) was the lead vessel of the four South Dakota-class fast battleships built for the United States Navy in the 1930s. The first American battleships designed after the Washington treaty system began to break down in the mid-1930s, they took advantage of an escalator clause that allowed increasing the main battery to 16-inch (410 mm) guns, but Congressional refusal to authorize larger battleships kept their displacement close to the Washington limit of 35,000 long tons (36,000 t). A requirement to be armored against the same caliber of guns as they carried, combined with the displacement restriction, resulted in cramped ships. Overcrowding was exacerbated by wartime modifications that considerably strengthened their anti-aircraft batteries and significantly increased their crews. South Dakota saw extensive action during World War II; immediately upon entering service in mid-1942, she was sent to the south Pacific to reinforce Allied forces waging the Guadalcanal campaign. The ship was damaged in an accidental grounding on an uncharted reef, but after completing repairs she returned to the front, taking part in the Battle of Santa Cruz in October and the Second Naval Battle of Guadalcanal in November. During the latter action, electrical failures hampered the ability of the ship to engage Japanese warships and she became the target of numerous Japanese vessels, sustaining over two-dozen hits that significantly damaged her superstructure but did not seriously threaten her buoyancy. South Dakota returned to the United States for repairs that lasted into 1943, after which she was briefly deployed to strengthen the British Home Fleet, tasked with protecting convoys to the Soviet Union. In mid-1943, the ship was transferred back to the Pacific, where she primarily operated with the fast carrier task force, contributing her heavy anti-aircraft armament to its defense. In this capacity, she took part in the Gilbert and Marshall Islands campaign in late 1943 and early 1944, the Mariana and Palau Islands campaign in mid-1944, and the Philippines campaign later that year. In 1945, she participated in the Battles of Iwo Jima and Okinawa and bombarded Japan three times. Following the end of the war in August 1945, she took part in the initial occupation of the country before returning to the United States in September. She later moved to the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, where she was laid up in the Atlantic Reserve Fleet until 1962, when she was sold for scrap. The South Dakota was ordered in the context of global naval rearmament during the breakdown of the Washington treaty system that had controlled battleship construction during the 1920s and early 1930s. Under the Washington and London treaties, so-called treaty battleships were limited to a standard displacement of 35,000 long tons (36,000 t) and a main battery of 14-inch (356 mm) guns. In 1936, following Japan's decision to abandon the treaty system, the United States Navy decided to invoke the "escalator clause" in the treaty that allowed displacements to rise to 45,000 long tons (46,000 t) and armament to increase to 16 in (406 mm) guns. Congressional objections to increasing the size of the new ships forced the design staff to keep displacement as close to 35,000 LT as possible while incorporating the larger guns and armor sufficient to defeat guns of the same caliber. South Dakota was 680 feet (210 m) long overall and had a beam of 108 ft 2 in (32.97 m) and a draft of 35 ft 1 in (10.69 m). She displaced 37,970 long tons (38,580 t) as designed and up to 44,519 long tons (45,233 t) at full combat load. The ship was powered by four-shaft General Electric steam turbines and eight oil-fired Babcock & Wilcox boilers rated at 130,000 shaft horsepower (97,000 kW), generating a top speed of 27.5 knots (50.9 km/h; 31.6 mph). The ship had a cruising range of 15,000 nautical miles (28,000 km; 17,000 mi) at a speed of 15 kn (28 km/h; 17 mph). She carried three Vought OS2U Kingfisher floatplanes for aerial reconnaissance, which were launched by a pair of aircraft catapults on her fantail. Her peace time crew numbered 1,793 officers and enlisted men but during the war the crew swelled to 2,500. The ship was armed with a main battery of nine 16-inch /45 caliber Mark 6 guns in three triple gun turrets on the centerline, two of which were placed in a superfiring pair forward, with the third aft. The secondary battery consisted of sixteen 5 in (127 mm) /38 caliber dual purpose guns mounted in twin turrets clustered amidships, four turrets on either side. This was two fewer turrets than her sisters, a reduction in weight and magazine space to accommodate the extra personnel and equipment for her use as a flagship. To compensate for the reduction in medium anti-aircraft firepower, she received light anti-aircraft guns. As designed, the ship was equipped with an anti-aircraft battery of twenty 1.1 in (28 mm) /75 caliber guns and twelve .50-caliber M2 Browning machine guns in single mounts, but she was completed with a battery of seven quadruple 40 mm (1.6 in) Bofors guns, seven quadruple 1.1 in guns, thirty-four 20 mm (0.79 in) Oerlikon autocannon in single mounts, and eight of the .50-cal. guns. The main armored belt was 12.2 in (310 mm) thick, while the main armored deck was up to 6 in (152 mm) thick. The main battery gun turrets had 18 in (457 mm) thick faces, and they were mounted atop barbettes that were 17.3 in (439 mm) thick. The conning tower had 16 in thick sides. South Dakota received a series of modifications through her wartime career, consisting primarily of additions to her anti-aircraft battery and various types of radar sets. The first addition was the installation of SC air search radar, ordered in 1941, that was fitted in the fore mast. It was later replaced with an SK type set. At the same time, an SG surface search radar was installed on the forward superstructure; a second SG set was added to the main mast after experiences during the Guadalcanal campaign in 1942. During fitting out in 1942, she received a Mark 3 fire control radar, mounted on her conning tower to assist in the direction of her main battery guns and Mark 4 radars for the secondary battery guns. The Mark 3 was quickly replaced with more modern Mark 8 fire control radar, and Mark 4 radars for the secondary battery guns. She later received Mark 12/22 sets in place of the Mark 4s. South Dakota also received a TDY jammer. In 1945, her traditional spotting scopes were replaced with Mark 27 microwave radar sets, and she received an SR air search radar and an SK-2 air search dish. The ship's light anti-aircraft battery was gradually expanded. In November 1942, eight more .50-cal machine guns were installed and during repairs in late 1942 and early 1943, two of her 1.1 in quadruple mounts were replaced with 40 mm quadruple mounts. By February 1943, all of her 1.1 in guns were removed and thirteen more 40 mm quadruple mounts were added. By this time, her 20 mm battery had been increased to 80 barrels, all in individual mounts. By the end of the war, eight of these had been removed. Hull A: Hull B: Hull C: Tier 9: USS Illinois (BB-65) Illinois (BB-65) was an uncompleted battleship originally intended to be the first ship of the Montana class. However, the urgent need for more warships at the outbreak of World War II and the U.S. Navy's experiences in the Pacific theater led it to conclude that rather than battleships larger and more heavily armed than the Iowa class, it quickly needed more fast battleships of that class to escort the new Essex-class aircraft carriers being built. As a result, hulls BB-65 and BB-66 were reordered and laid down as Iowa-class battleships in 1942. As such, she was intended to be the fifth member of the Iowa-class constructed, and the fourth navy ship to be named in honor of the 21st US state. Compared to the Montana-class design which would have originally been ordered as BB-65, Illinois would have gained five knots in speed and the ability to transit the locks of the Panama Canal. However, construction of BB-65 as an Iowa-class battleship also left her with a reduction in her main battery from twelve 16-inch (410 mm) guns to nine, and without the additional armor that she was planned for. Like her sister ship Kentucky (BB-66), Illinois was still under construction at the end of World War II. She was canceled in August 1945, but her hull remained as a parts hulk until she was broken up in 1958. Illinois's keel was laid down at the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, on 6 December 1942; her projected completion date was 1 May 1945. This amounted to a construction time of about 30 months. Based on wartime experience, she would have been tasked primarily with the defense of the US fleet of Essex-class aircraft carriers. In adherence with the Iowa-class design, Illinois would have a maximum beam of 108 ft 2 in (32.97 m) and a waterline length of 860 ft (260 m), permitting a maximum speed of 33 knots (61.1 km/h; 38.0 mph). In addition to a main battery of nine 16-inch (406 mm) guns and secondary battery of twenty 5-inch (127 mm) guns, she would also have carried forty-nine 20-millimeter (0.79 in) and eighty 40-millimeter (1.57 in) anti-aircraft guns. Like Iowa-class ships from Missouri (hull number BB-63) onward, the frontal bulkhead armor was increased from the original 11.3 in (287 mm) to 14.5 in (368 mm) in order to better protect against fire from frontal sectors. Furthermore, like Kentucky, Illinois differed from her earlier sisters in that her design called for an all-welded construction, which would have saved weight due to increased strength over a combination riveted/welded hull used on the four completed Iowas. Additionally, engineers revised the torpedo protection system scheme of the Iowa-class to address some of the design flaws, such as excessive rigidity of the lower belt armor causing leakage in adjacent compartments in the event of a torpedo hit; the revised scheme had improvements such as removing knuckles in certain holding bulkheads; these alterations were estimated to improve both Illinois and Kentucky's torpedo protection by as much as 20%. Funding for the battleship was provided in part by "King Neptune", a Hereford swine auctioned across the state of Illinois as a fundraiser, ultimately helping to raise $19 million in war bonds. The Illinois's tier 9 design! (Being revamped) Hull A: (Original sketch) (In detail) Tier 10: USS Louisiana Louisiana was to be the fifth and final Montana-class battleship. She was to be named in honor of the 18th state and assigned to the Norfolk Navy Yard, Portsmouth, Virginia. Louisiana would have been the third ship to bear that name had she been commissioned. By hull number, Louisiana was the last American battleship authorized for construction. Tier 10 Louisiana details! (Being revamped) Hull schemes for reference: (Disclaimer: There would be no helicopter.) Tiers 9 and 10 for line 2 will be revamped sever times. Once they are updated each time, let me know what you guys think. :) Sources: 1. USS Delaware https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Delaware_(BB-28) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delaware-class_battleship 2. USS Florida https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Florida_(BB-30) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida-class_battleship 3. USS Nevada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Nevada_(BB-36) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevada-class_battleship 4. USS Pennsylvania https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Pennsylvania_(BB-38) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania-class_battleship 5. USS Tennessee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Tennessee_(BB-43) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee-class_battleship 6. USS South Dakota https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_South_Dakota_(BB-57) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota-class_battleship_(1939) 7. USS Illinois https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Illinois_(BB-65) https://www.deviantart.com/tzoli/art/Iowa-class-King-Nimitz-Redesign-797904258 8. USS Louisiana https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Louisiana_(BB-71) To do list: -Events -Collection -Game-play -In game descriptions -Commander Skills (Probably) -Upgrades and modifications
  10. Hello there, I'm hoping for an assist. I'm new to WoWs. What is the community's suggestion for new captains to meander down? Note, I'm not asking for the "best overall line" or "best tier X". I've played tens of thousands of WoT and WoWp games and I know that I'm not in a rush to get to Tier X yet. I would like to know a few tech tree lines that will help me learn proper tactics and ship usage. Maybe one DD, one CA, one BB line for posterity that would allow me to grow as a Captain. Your opinions are appreciated!
  11. Pan American Premium Cruiser Veinticinco de Mayo Tier V Veinticinco de Mayo General characteristics: Displacement: 6,800 tons (standard) 9,000 tons (full load) Length: 171 m (561 ft 0 in) Beam: 17.82 m (58 ft 6 in) Draught: 4.66 m (15 ft 3 in) Propulsion: 2 shaft Parsons turbines, 6 oil-fired boilers, 85,000 hp (63,000 kW) Speed: 32 knots (59 km/h) Range: 8,030 nautical miles (14,870 km) at 14 knots (26 km/h) Complement: 780 Armament: 6 × 190 mm (7.5 inch)/52 caliber guns (3 × 2) 12 × 102 mm (4 inch)/45 caliber DP guns (6 × 2) 6 × Vickers-Terni 40/39 mm AA guns 6 × 533 mm (21-inch) torpedo tubes Armour: 70 mm (2.75 inch) inch belt 25 mm (1 inch) deck 50 mm (2 inch) gun turrets 60 mm (2.3 inch) conning tower Aircraft carried: 2 × Grumman J2F Duck aircraft Aviation facilities: Catapult launcher https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veinticinco_de_Mayo-class_cruiser
  12. Pan European Cruiser Line Tier I Van Kingsbergen Tier II Blas de Lezo Tier III Java Tier IV De Ruyter Tier V Almirante Tier VI Tre Kronor Tier VII Canarias Tier X Holland Links: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HNLMS_Van_Kinsbergen_(1939) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blas_de_Lezo-class_cruiser https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HNLMS_Java_(1921) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HNLMS_De_Ruyter_(1935) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_cruiser_Almirante_Cervera https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tre_Kronor-class_cruiser https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_cruiser_Canarias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_1047_battlecruiser Please leave suggestions in the comments. It is really hard to find high tier European cruisers and I did my best to assemble a cruiser line.
  13. Pan European Destroyer Line Tier II Wolf Tier III Aetos Tier IV Churucca Tier V Regele Ferdinand Tier VI Class Vasilefs Giorgios Tier VII Grom Tier VIII Orkan Tier IX Öland Tier X Halland Please leave suggestions in the comments. It is really hard to find high tier European destroyers and I did my best to assemble a destroyer line. Thank you! Links: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf-class_destroyer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aetos-class_destroyer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churruca-class_destroyer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regele_Ferdinand-class_destroyer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_destroyer_Vasilefs_Georgios https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORP_Grom_(1936) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORP_Orkan_(G90) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Öland-class_destroyer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halland-class_destroyer
  14. SteelShadow105

    XP?

    Ok, I understand that in order to get a good amount of xp you have to get an array of ribbons and deal a good amount of damage. What I don't understand is that I do those very things and yet I still get crapxp. I've played matches before where I did far less, yet still got better rewards. I've never minded having to grind to get through the tech tree, but I've gotten so close to just stop trying because I have matches like this that makes it take Forever to climb up. I still remember how many matches I had to play just to reach Kongo and Myoko. Not to mention the even slower crawl to New Mexico. I've always tried so hard to get as much xp as I can that I don't even play the game anymore, I just play to get damage just so I can get decent progress on a battleship or cruiser that I don't even like playing. I know part of it is just my capabilities as a player, but it isn't always just me. In that match I was the one who had received the most xp for my team, so everyone else on my team, whether the did damage or not, practically received no rewards. That's not even the first match I've seen like that. I've noticed that many matches I've played the most a team would get is around 9-800 xp. How does anyone make progress with that? Even when I do get above 1500 base xp I still feel like I never really got much further. Sure it wouldnt take too long to reach a 100k xp or so to get to your next ship (especially when you have premium), but thats not even including the hulls you have to research, or the other modules just so you can play the ship where it can actually be effective. All I'm trying to get at is that the xp system never seems consistent, and in the end gives so little progress, especially when it comes to new comers trying to get to their ideal ships. If there is any advice on this I am happy to listen.
  15. Cold War Era Ships Tech Tree Idea (Please read this carefully WG and leave your opinion and Ideas to Add) Introduction I have always wondered if WG was going to expand the World of Warships Tech Tree. I am not at tier 10 yet but when you reach the top, What do you do. I had the idea to expand the tech tree to ships in the mid-1970s or early 80s. How it Works The tech tree will be split so that ships armed with guns won't have to fight more modern missile armed ships. The maps will have to be bigger to accommodate long-range battles. Frigates should also be introduced into the game. They have week armor but in large numbers, can defeat a cruiser. Battleships will be removed because of its guns are no match for long-range missiles but with one exception! The modernized Iowa class battle armed with more advanced radar, missiles, and CIWS can be in the premium tech tree. The Essex class carrier and the Midway class carrier will reappear modernized, as well as other ships. No submarines will be included. USS Lexington, modernized Essex class carrier. USS Midway, modernized Midway class carrier. CIWS CIWS stands for close-in weapons system. It is made up of either small anti-aircraft missiles or gatling cannons like the 20-mm M61 Vulcan autocannon. It works exactly like AA. The gatling guns can act as AA or as secondaries. You can't control it. It is automatic like AA and secondaries. Missiles, Guns, and Torpedoes It will be the same controls as the main battery. Missile launchers can reload also. Guns are used the same way as before but they are less effective. Overall, missiles will now be the primary weapon. Torpedoes are the same as before. Ship Types Frigates Destroyers Cruisers CVA or CVN With the addition of more modern carries, carrier born jet fighters can be introduced. Please comment to leave your opinion or add an idea. This is just the beginning of this idea and needs more development!
  16. I've been in the Forums recently regarding my return to WOWS after about a year. I have yet to get a computer capable to get me back in. Working on it. But I've noticed that other players can access my profile, tech tree, Port, etc. I want to get the FIJI, UK T7 Cruiser. I can see the research and purchase costs on the Wiki pages, but I don't know if this figures are only if one moves up from T6 in that tree. I don't know what it would cost me from wherever I'd be starting from. Dont have much, if anything, in that tree. If someone could tell me what the FIJI would cost me, in research and purchase, I would either name my first born after you, and/or miss you on purpose in future encounters (or offer you a fully exposed broadside for up to 30 days lol). Beyond that, Ive received the Buffalo, in absentia, but hear nothing but bad about it. Gow can I get to the one other objective that haunts me... Des Moines? ANY help would be genuinely appreciated. Thanks.
  17. In the build up to World War 2, the nigh-extinct idea of the Battlecruiser began to resurface in a different from in the minds of naval engineers. Due to the Washington Naval Treaty, the two main capital ship classes were considered to be "Treaty Battleships" (Battleships built under the 35,000 tonne 16" main gun limit), and "Treaty Cruisers/Heavy Cruisers"(Cruisers built under the 10,000 tonne 8" main gun limit). Treaty battleships began to be mostly considered as "Fast Battleships", the combined idea of the old Dreadnought-style battleships with heavy armour and armament with relatively low top speeds, and Battlecruiser-style battleships that sacrificed armour or firepower for speed. Fast battleships, for the most part, incorporated the positives of both types of ship. As world tensions began to rise again and the new naval arms race for capital ships was kicked off by the German Deutschland-class Panzerschiffes, naval designers began to look at lighter intermediate designs between the treaty battleship the treaty cruisers. Most navies around the world had developed both expensive treaty battleships, and had a large fleet of treaty cruisers at their disposal. Something was needed that could outmatch a treaty cruiser, but wouldn't be as expensive as a treaty battleship. Naval engineers flicked through their archives, reading on the ups and downs of the battlecruisers of WW1. The two main employers of Battlecruisers, the British Royal Navy and the German Imperial Kaiserliche Marine, approached the idea differently. The British sacrificed the protection of the ship to increase the speed, the Germans sacrificed the calibre of the main guns on the ship to increase the speed. After World War 1, many navies were laying out construction plans to construct both dreadnought Battleships and Battlecruisers, but the Washington Naval Treaty put a stop to this. In the build up and during World War 2, however, most navies had disregarded the Washington Naval Treaty entirely. The Imperial Japanese Navy had two enemies: the United States Navy and the Royal Navy. Whilst the Japanese had arguably the best and most heavily-armed heavy cruisers in the world during the 1920's-1930's, they ultimately had less than the Royal Navy in the build up to the war, and as the war went on less than the USN as the juggernaut that was the American Military Industrial Complex roared to life. As per the Japanese way of thinking, they demanded individual superiority over numerical supremacy. Following the successful design of the Yamato-class super battleships, plans begun to be drawn up of a new modern form of a battlecruiser designated the "Super Type A Cruiser" (Everyone hated the name battlecruiser and had to make up their own term), in what became known as the Yamato-style warship, a design that was, in terms of simple design, pretty successful. These ships were designed for the night battle portion of the Decisive Battle doctrine; being able to successfully outmatch American or British cruisers at night, also employing nighttime torpedo attacks. The Super Type A Cruiser project would be a class of large warships armed with 12.2" (and later 14.2") guns, a required top speed of 33 knots, armour strong enough to protect against 8" gunfire. The design was later escalated in 1942, when the Japanese caught wind of the Alaska-class Large Cruisers under construction. Now, onto what this mini tech tree will look like! AmazingPhotoshopSkills.jpeg Given that these ships never officially had fancier names than a bunch of numbers and letters, I've given them unofficial names in line with the IJN Naming scheme (They're technically battlecruisers, so they're named after mountains, the names being taken from earlier protected cruisers/battlecruisers.) These ships were designated Super Type A Cruisers, to show that they were superior to Type A Cruisers (Heavy Cruisers, as per international standards). There is also no tier seven, or at least not an applicable one I could find. Now, onto the three ships! NOTE: I am considering doing a different version of this tree by dropping everything down one tier and sitting the Number 13 class at tier ten in this line, as the tier ten slot in any secondary IJN BB tree will likely go to the Tosa class, as the Tosa-class was designed to be upgraded to be armed with 434mm (17") guns designed purely for attacking enemy capital ships, making her into essentially a Battleship-Killer. TIER VIII - Super Type A Cruiser Design B-65-A "Tsukaba" Sitting at tier VIII branching off from either the Amagi or Mogami (or both? up to you Wargaming) is actually a later and controversial design, the design I have designated Design B-65-A "Tsukaba". There is debate as to whether there was a design for a Super Type A Cruiser armed with 14.2" (360cm) dual guns to counteract the American Alaska-class Large Cruisers, and to have thicker armour to protect against the 12" guns of the Alaska class. Another issue is the secondary armament; here it shows the 12.7cm/40 Type 89 mod.31, the enclose 12.7cm DP gun found on the Yamato, Izumo, and on some of the IJN carriers, whilst most sources show or states that the Super Type A Cruiser was designed to be armed with the new 10cm/65 Type 98 DP gun, a gun that was superior to the 12.7cm/40 Type 89 in almost every way. Nonetheless, this design may have existed, as in the process of designing a warship things are changed all the time. It is also unclear as to specifically what guns that Tsukaba would have; It is stated that she would have specifically 14.2" (360cm) in new Yamato-style turrets (Yamato was a really good design overall, at least, that's what the Japanese Admiralty saw her as. Whether these guns are actually newly-designed guns or merely the recycled guns of Ise and Hyuuga, perhaps, is something I haven't been able to pinpoint (and help would be appreciated). In terms of raw stats, there is some information missing, but Tsukaba's general stats are pretty much the same as what it says on Wikipedia, aside from the armour: Designed 33 knot speed, but it may have outperformed this the stock hull will probably have the 5" DP guns as seen above, and the top hull will obviously have upgraded AA and the proper 10cm/65 Type 98 DP guns. Oh, it should be mentioned, All of these ships carry two quadruple mount 61cm torpedo tubes firing Type 93 torpedoes. They'll likely fire the Type 93 mod.2 found on Ibuki, Fubuki and Kagerou. Tsukaba is designed for one purpose; hunting down cruisers. Her high top speed, decent artillery, strong AA, decent armour, powerful torpedoes are all tools tailored for this exact purpose. If only we knew things like, I don't know, the rate of fire of the guns... Anyway, next! TIER IX: Super Type A Cruiser Design B-64 "Ikoma" Sitting at tier Nine, equal to Alaska in my other USN Large Cruiser tree, is Super Type A Cruiser Design B-64, dubbed "Ikoma" (The CV Ikoma wasn't even laid down until 1943, and the Unryuu's stole from the BC/BB naming scheme). Yes, Amagi is also technically Design B-64, but Ikoma here is also Design B-64 because the IJN, like most navies, loved repeating stuff. This is why exact Russian ship models, for example, can be hard to find, because Project numbers were re-used. Plus, Amagi herself had about 3 different designs I can think of off the top of my head, and Kii and the Number 13 class had even more. While Amagi was a battlecruiser design, Ikoma was, as the Japanese preferred at least, a Super Type A Cruiser design. Now, onto Ikoma herself. Ikoma was the first finalised design of the Super Type A Cruisers, with 9 12.2" guns mounted in 3 x 3 turrets that can actually be found on sites like Navweaps (source below), 16 total 10cm/65 Type 98 DP guns in 8 x 2 turrets, similar to Zaou's secondaries, two quadruple 61cm torpedo launchers firing Type 93 mod.2 torpedoes, up to 8.3" thick belt armour, a 5" armoured deck, 33 knot top speed that it may have outperformed, and pretty mediocre AA that will probably get a buff in-game, and displacing about 35,000 tonnes that may end up with her having a lot of health. Ikoma is the quintessential cruiser hunter; fast, good protection against cruisers, powerful, quick-firing hard-hitting guns, with torpedoes to slap up any bigger ship that gets too close, similar to how Scharnhorst plays, but at tier nine with bigger guns, better torpedoes, etc. Basically, If you love Scharnhorst, Ikoma may just be your cup of tea. These Super Type A Cruisers had two ordered in the the 1941 Circle Five Program, that wouldn't have started until 1942, and would have taken until 1950 to complete, with another 4 Super Type A Cruisers planned for the Circle Six Program, established just before Japan's entry to World War 2. TIER X: Super Type A Cruiser Design B-65-B "Kurama" Up at tier ten is the upgraded Super Type A Cruiser designed to counteract the Alaska-class Large Cruiser, that was designed to counteract both IJN heavy cruisers in general and the Super Type A Cruisers. Following closely to the Japanese preference of individual superiority, the Super Type A Cruiser design B-64 was rethought, and turned into a few new designs, the one here being Design B-65-B "Kurama". Kurama was up-armed to have 14.2" guns in three triple turrets, and have improved armour to protect against the Alaska-class' 12" guns, and, depending on the source, either still had or didn't have the two quadruple torpedo launchers. Not a whole lot exists on the B-65-B design, as these designs had a medium priority before the war, and the absolute bottom priority when Japan entered the war, ranked below even Battleships. Similar to the proceeding ships, Kurama would likely play in the same role as Scharnhorst; protecting allied ships from cruisers, while supporting allied battleships fighting against other battleships with quicker 14.2" gunfire. Between Kurama and Ikoma, the only major changes is the increase in gun size and the improvement of the armour; the secondaries, AA guns (which will need a buff to work at tier ten), and the torpedoes may stay the same. In terms of health, B-65-B is estimated to displace roughly 40,000 tonnes, so she'll likely have around 60,000 health in the least. Up at tier ten, if my other American Large Cruiser tree will go in, Kurama will come up against Hawaii in... a remarkably similar fashion. Hawaii has a strong AA suite, and a main armament of 12 12" guns in four triple turrets, two forward and two aft, while Kurama has 9 larger 14.2" guns in a three triple turrets, in the 2-A-1 setup that became standard on most modern battleship and cruiser designs. Scharnhorst is a good reference to the playstyle of both Large Cruisers and Super Type A Cruisers: fast, dynamic, and a breath of fresh air in some cases to battleship gameplay. God, the digging I had to do to find some of this information. There's also conflicting information, which will either lead to a flame war or a variety of options to choose from. I am considering doing a different form of this tech tree with Battleship no. 13 at tier ten, but actually, Kurama's design ended up being quite a nice rival to the Hawaii in my American Large Cruiser tree. As always, thanks for reading through these walls of text I occasionally smash out, and see you on the high seas, Captains! Editorials: 1: Jinxed_Katajainen has brought it to my attention that these are intended to be Type 98 mountings, possibly the same style as what historically Ooyodo had and what Hakuryuu has in-game. Footnotes:
  18. As a someone who primarily plays BBs, I've always kept an eye on the development and eventual introduction of new BB lines to the game. As of right now, off the top of my head, there seem to be actual ships available to fill several yet to be introduced lines, including: a British 2nd BB or battlecruiser line, a German battlecruiser line that might have no actual ships to fill in at above tier 8, a Japanese 2nd BB line featuring ships cancelled by the treaties and/or those that couldn't be built (like the replacement for the Kongos), an Italian BB line, and maybe just maybe a Russian/Soviet BB line. Out of all of those lines, I find the Russian/Soviet line to be the most elusive and potentially tricky to implement obviously due to historical facts and circumstances. But considering WG's background, I doubt a Russian/Soviet BB line is something they would be willing to give up on easily. (Unless they wanna go down the free xp or pay to win route ) As player, I think having such tech tree line might add good and welcomed content to the game, as BBs are relatively rare in comparison to smaller ships in history. It seems that some of the previous discussions on the forums and online on this topic point to a tree that roughly works out like this: Tier 3 - some variant of a prototype dreadnought or semi-dreadnought (as the Nikolai and ships similar to it might be too strong for tier 3, while Andrei Pervozvanny class pre-dreadnoughts might be too weak?) Tier 4 & 5 - variants or versions of the Gangut and/or Imperatritsa Mariya classes of dreadnoughts in different stages of modernization both historical or speculative Tier 6 - Borodino class battlecruisers: 4x3 356mm main battery and capable of 26.5 knots before modernization Tier 7 - Kronshtadt class battlecruiser, or a version of it: a configuration of the ship that uses 3x2 380mm German guns was mentioned? (it kind of becomes a Russian Gneisenau in game?) Tier 8 - Stalingrad class battlecruiser, or a version of it: it seems that the plan is to make them stand out as fast and having higher DPM than typical BBs in exchange for their marginal armor and smaller gun caliber? Tier 9 - Sovetsky Soyuz class battleship: it'll be the highest HP (60K ston displacement) and tankiest BB at tier 9, although probably also the slowest (28 knots) and a big target for HE spam? Tier 10 - Project 24 battleship (super Sovetsky Soyuz): this could get tricky in regards to the game's meta depending on how the ship's implemented. I've read that the ship is to be the tier 9 ship upgunned with 9x457mm guns, others mention 430mm guns, while others spoke of a design influenced by the Italians? As far as premium ships are concerned: The Novorossiysk (ex Italian battleship Giulio Cesare rearmed with Soviet 305mm guns and AA guns) should be a suitable tier 5 and fairly similar to Italian version of it (maybe with less gun alpha but higher dpm and better aa?) Meanwhile the Arkhangelsk (ex HMS Royal Sovereign) could make a decent tier 6 premium BB as a slower but better armored QE class BB? At tier 8, the Italian (Ansaldo) designed U.P. 41 battleship could also make a decent premium ship. It should be a Littorio class style BB uparmed with 3x3 406mm guns and an inferior torpedo defense system? To me, this rough idea on the line seem to work and I would love to eventually grind this line should it ever become available. But then as you all know, recently the Kronshtadt and Stalingrad have both been introduced into the game as high tier cruisers with some BB traits. That fact alone might signal the scuttling of a full tech tree BB line for the Soviets/Russians in the future. So how do you feel about this? What you think should be WG's proper plan moving forward regarding this? Can a proper Russian/Soviet BB line still work without the Kronshtadt and the Stalingrad? What have you heard about this recently? I'd love to hear from you all but would regret to miss out on this line in game...
  19. Grand_Admiral_Murrel

    [WIP] RN Battlecruiser Arc

    Been doing some research, and kinda started wondering why the Royal Navy couldn't stand to have a second branch of battleships in-game. Of course, they'd have to be different from the current line to be attractive, so why not have a battlecruiser line? There is no shortage of battlecruisers built by the royal navy; a new arc could likely start as early as tier 3, since the first battlecruisers were laid down at the same time as HMS Dreadnought. I would appreciate it if other players could recommend ships they'd like to see, if this new branch were to materialize in the near future. As battlecruisers (and not battleships), they would feature large calibre guns typically found on battleships, but sacrifice some armour for a speed advantage. As a side note, it would be nice to have Royal Navy battleships that don't sling OP HE all the time, and without an absurd repair party. Instead, I propose better AP (or at least standard compared to other nations) and not-so-OP HE. Also, many of the ships I have named carried some form of torpedo armament. Might be interesting (and make sense) for these to b the standard Royal Navy torpedo launchers, which can launch single torpedoes. The stats provided are historically accurate *cough*, so bear with me. All proposed HP values were calculated using player Fr05ty's tried and true formulas, which he graciously provided. In my work, I noticed that there seems to be a 12% increase in HP for the existing British battleships. This change has not been accounted for in the numbers I offer below. Designs yet to consider: https://warshipprojects.wordpress.com/2017/07/03/washington-cherrytrees-2/ https://warshipprojects.wordpress.com/2017/09/25/washington-cherrytrees-2-ii/ https://warshipprojects.wordpress.com/2017/09/27/washington-cherry-trees-ii-part-3/ I3 J3 K2, K3 L1 L2, L3 M2 M3 N3 X4 Design Y Design B, C1, C2, D Design A Design T1 LII LIII Battlecruisers K --> A Battleships L --> Z J3, I3, H3a, H3b, H3c – battlecruisers all-in; Nov.-Dec. 1920 O3 F2, F3 Here are my ideas for potential ships, by tier: TIER III Invincible class (HMS Invincible, HMS Inflexible, HMS Indomitable) Main armament: 4x2 305 mm guns 2x2 450 mm torpedo tubes (one on each side, amidships) 1x1 450 mm torpedo tube (stern-mounted) Secondary armament: 16x1 102 mm guns Speed: 25 knots (ridiculous speed at tier 3, let alone tier 4) Displacement: 21,084 tonnes HP: 35,700 (vs Bellerophon at 38,100) TIER IV Indefatigable class (HMS Indefatigable, HMS New Zealand, HMAS Australia*) Main armament: 4x2 305 mm guns Speed: 25 knots Displacement: 22,846 HP: 37,800 (vs Orion at 42,700) This ship is far below the average 43,900 of other tier 4 ships, and therefore would need to be buffed. HMS Neptune (below) - very similar to Imperial Germany's Kaiser class... nothing special in my opinion. Please let me know if there is any disagreement in the comments below. Premium... maybe? Succeeded by very similar Colossus class dreadnought (only real difference being more torpedoes... but who doesn't love a battleship armed with torpedoes?). TIER V Lion class (HMS Lion, HMS Princess Royal) - As there exists a Lion in-game, the latter name would be better Main armament: 4x2 343 mm guns Speed: 28 knots HP: 47,200 (current maximum HP at tier 4 is 46,400, with the average at 43,920. If this ship were to be used at tier 4, its HP would have to be nerfed moderately. HMS Queen Mary Main armament: 4x2 343 mm guns Speed: 28 knots HMS Tiger Main armament: 4x2 343 mm guns 2x2 533 mm torpedo launchers (one pair amidships on each side) Secondary armament: 12x1 152 mm guns Speed: 28 knots Displacement: 34,332 tonnes HP: 51,400 (vs Iron Duke at 47,100) HMS Canada (aka Almirante Latorre (below), could be the first South American (Chilean) battleship in-game) Main armament: 5x2 356 mm guns 4x 533 mm torpedo tubes Speed: 23 knots HMS Agincourt - unique in that it was armed with 7x 2 305 mm guns and 3x 1 torpedo tubes; this ship has an interesting story, but it isn't truly a battlecruiser (it is a true dreadnought), and therefore might make a very appealing premium ship rather than fitting into this proposed line. TIER VI Renown Class (HMS Renown (below), HMS Repulse) - could be a little OP at tier 6, stats similar to Gneisenau at tier 7 Main armament: 3x2 381 mm guns 2x1 533mm torpedo launchers (mounted in the bow) Secondary armament: 5x3 102 mm guns 2x1 102 mm guns Speed: 31 knots Displacement: 33,265 tonnes (slightly less than the HMS Tiger) HP: 50,130 (vs Queen Elizabeth at 55,300) (Note that this is slightly less than my calculated values for HMS Tiger at tier 5) FOR LOLZ: the Courageous class (HMS Courageous, HMS Glorious, HMS Furious), in particular HMS Furious, which had a grand total of 2x 457 mm guns... this would make an "interesting" premium light cruiser, considering it had the armour of a light cruiser. This thing could lol-pen anything within several tiers, but the number of guns is a "limitation". Personally I wouldn't buy it unless it had a decent reload, and even then... If enough interest arises in these ridiculous ships, I will post their stats, but here's a pic to satisfy your interest: TIER VII Admiral Class (HMS Hood, HMS Anson, HMS Howe, HMS Rodney) Main armament: 4x2 381 mm guns 10x1 torpedo tubes!!! Secondary armament: 12x1 139 mm guns Speed: 32 knots Displacement: 48,191 tonnes (based on Hood's displacement) HP: 67,800 (vs Hood at 67,700) TIER VIII G3 Battlecruisers (paper ships) Main armament: 3x3 406 mm guns 2x2 622 mm torpedo launchers (some serious calibre) Secondary armament: 8x2 152 mm guns Speed: 32 knots Displacement: 55,652 tonnes HP: 76,574 TIER IX *** Ideas welcome Different iteration of G3? Move rear turret closer to stern, faster reload? TIER X N3 Battlecruisers (paper ships) - the ship to rival the Yamato (difference in calibre of 3 mm) Main armament: 3x3 457 mm guns 2x3 (or 2x4) 533 mm torpedo launchers Secondary armament: 8x2 152 mm guns Speed: 30 knots (maybe increased for the tier) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *HMAS Australia would be a good addition to the Commonwealth tech tree Please send me suggestions by replying! Also, here's a link to a very similar topic on the Asia forum: https://forum.worldofwarships.asia/topic/3961-british-royal-navy-and-battlecruisers/
  20. [WIP] German Cruiser (Panzerschiffe) Arc GANZ GEHEIM! First and foremost, a special thank-you to @Fr05ty for all his assistance to give this shipwreck of a thread more credibility! The following arc would best fit into the German tech tree as a branch off of the current heavy cruiser line. Indeed, these "panzerschiffe" are somewhere between cruisers and battlecruisers, and therefore are a bit difficult to classify. I chose to treat them as very large cruisers, like the Graf Spee and USS Alaska are. They would offer an entirely unique playstyle, boasting high speeds, decent maneuverability, and guns that make regular cruisers think twice before engaging. They lack significant armour (typical cruiser armour), and therefore they would likely be more "opportunistic" hunters than brawlers. Most likely, a quick strike and then an even quicker retreat would be favourable. The guns mounted aboard these ships would have an admirable reload, and the shells would have a high velocity. Also note that, while these ships were mostly paper designs (Plan Z), the likelihood of their existence, had war not broken out in 1939, would have been very high. In most cases, the ships were either started and not finished or the designs were contracted out and then cancelled due to a change in priorities. Before I jump into the ships, I first want to address the current stats of existing in-game "super-heavy" cruisers that are most similar to the ships I am proposing. Ship HP VI Graf Spee 39,400 IX Alaska 60,800 IX Kronshtadt 71,050 X Stalingrad 72,450 X Azuma (B65) 71,800 *Note: While many may consider Scharnhorst and Gneisenau to be battlecruisers, they do not fit into the data sets of the ships in the above table. WG treats them as fast battleships, and so that is how the numbers play out. I would like to see at least one heal on these ships, as well as the traditional German hydroacoustic search. I am welcome to suggestions!!! Ships yet to be classified: Panzerschiff D Design 3b, Ersatz Elsass (19,000 tons), 2x3 or 2x4 283 mm guns L21 alpha L20e alpha L27, L28 Tier 6: Lutzow (Likely not to be included in this tree, as the current Graf Spee is too close to the cruiser-style gameplay. The D-class would provide the better battlecruiser experience) Main armament: 2x3 283 mm guns Reload time: 20 s 180 degree turn time: 25 s Initial shell velocity: 910 m/s AP shell maximum damage: 8,400 HE shell maximum damage: 3,200 HE shell fire chance: 20% 2x4 torpedo launchers Secondary armament: 8x1 150 mm guns 3x2 105 mm dual-purpose guns HP: 38,900 Armour: Main belt: 80 mm Deck: 45 mm (substantial) Superstructure: Main battery face: 360 mm Maneuverability: 29 knots Tier 6 alternative: Prinz Heinrich (P-class) Main armament: 2x3 283 mm guns Reload time: 16 s 180 degree turn time: 25 s Initial shell velocity: 910 m/s AP shell maximum damage: 8,400 HE shell maximum damage: 3,200 HE shell fire chance: 20% 2x3 torpedo launchers Secondary armament: 2x2 150 mm guns (mounted centerline) 4x2 105 mm dual-purpose guns Armour: Main belt: 120 mm Deck: 20 mm Superstructure: Main battery face: 360 mm HP: 49,300 Maneuverability: 33 knots Tier 7: Ersatz Elsass (D-class) Main armament: 2x4 283 mm guns Reload time: 18 s 180 degree turn time: 25 s Initial shell velocity: 910 m/s AP shell maximum damage: 8,400 HE shell maximum damage: 3,200 HE shell fire chance: 20% 2x3 torpedo launchers Secondary armament: 4x2 150 mm guns (mounted at each corner of the superstructure) 4x2 105 mm dual-purpose guns Armour: Main belt: 220 mm Deck: 35 mm Superstructure: Main battery face: 360 mm HP: 45,400 Maneuverability: 30 knots Tier 8: Admiral Zenker (1928 Design) Main armament: 4x2 305mm guns Reload time: 22 s 180 degree turn time: 30 s Initial shell velocity: 860 m/s AP shell maximum damage: 9,100 HE shell maximum damage: 4,000 HE shell fire chance: 20% 2x3 torpedo launchers Secondary armament: 3x3 150mm guns (think tier V Konigsberg's turrets) Armour: Main belt: Deck: Superstructure: Main battery: HP: 51,300 Maneuverability: 34 knots Tier 9 PREMIUM: Siegfried (O-class) Main armament: 3x2 380 mm guns Reload time: 24 s 180 degree turn time: 36 s Initial shell velocity: 840 m/s AP shell maximum damage: 11,600 HE shell maximum damage: 4,400 HE shell fire chance: 34% 2x3 torpedo launchers Secondary armament: 3x2 150 mm guns 4x2 105 mm dual-purpose guns Armour: Main belt: Deck: Superstructure: Main battery: HP: 64,200 Maneuverability: 35 knots Tier 10: (UNKNOWN) Main armament: 4x3 305 mm guns Reload time: 25 s 180 degree turn time: 25 s Initial shell velocity: 910 m/s AP shell maximum damage: 8,400 HE shell maximum damage: 3,200 HE shell fire chance: 20% 2x3 torpedo launchers Secondary armament: 5x2 150 mm guns 8x2 105 mm dual-purpose guns Armour: Main belt: 225 mm Deck: 20 mm Superstructure: 16 mm Main battery face: 360 mm HP: 70,000 Maneuverability: 35 knots Tier 10 PREMIUM: (Panzerschiffe D Neuentwurf II) Main armament: 3x3 283 mm guns Reload time: 16 s 180 degree turn time: 25 s Initial shell velocity: 910 m/s AP shell maximum damage: 8,400 HE shell maximum damage: 3,200 HE shell fire chance: 20% 2x3 torpedo launchers Secondary armament: 4x2 150 mm guns 7x2 105 mm dual-purpose guns Armour: Main belt: 225 mm Deck: 20 mm Superstructure: 16 mm Main battery face: 360 mm HP: 70,000 Maneuverability: 35 knots Other designs to be considered: Ship/Design ID Displacement Main Battery Maximum Armour thickness ~1933~ D-33/I D-33/II D-33/IIIa D-33/IIIb D-33/IIIc D-33/IV ~1934~ D-34/I D-34/II (later D-35) (Neuentwurf I) D-34/III (Neuentwurf II) ~1935~ D-35/I D-35/II D-35/III D-35/IV D-35/V (later D-35/VI) (would later become Scharnhorst-class) Older version of Design D and E (Gneisenau and Scharnhorst) 30,400 9x283 mm/3x2 330 mm/3x2 350 mm Panzerschiff F (Bismarck)/G (Tirpitz) original designs 35,000??? 4x2 350 mm To be continued... [WIP] The problem with battlecruisers is that they are really hard to classify using the current "battleship or cruiser" division. USS Alaska, for example, is basically a battlecruiser. It does not fit the battleship formula for HP, nor does it fit the cruiser formula. It's kinda in-between. Using the battleship formula, it should have 51,300 HP. Using the cruiser formula, it should have 73,700 HP. The in-game ship has 60,800 HP (almost EXACTLY halfway). Graf Spee, on the other hand, fits the cruiser formula very closely, with roughly a 6.75% buff.
  21. A_Horde_of_Sharks

    What was your favorite cruiser line to grind?

    Shortly after my year-long hiatus due to computer problems, I finally managed to acquire my first tier 10 warship: Moskva. Despite playing numerous games in her and extensively using it in ranked, I find her surprisingly ineffective and a chore to play. After my disappointment, I realized, "how many russian cruisers did I actually keep?" It was then I realized I only kept Budyonny and Shchors, the only two ships out of the entire line I seemed to enjoy. The reasons I did not enjoy Moskva was her lack of flexibility. The turning rate and concealment were so bad, it essentially forced me into combat as a spamming bow tanker, unable to leave or formulate a new strategy once the engagement reaches a certain distance. Since I lacked the brain to quit a line while I was ahead, I will ask the community two questions instead. 1) What was your favorite cruiser line to grind? (Yes, even the Russians count...) 2) What line do you think I should grind in its entirety? (No not the Russians this time. Anything but them... Please have mercy... I would rather eat a pine-cone.....) Any advice is welcome!
  22. I know there's so many of these subjects but there's something that concerns me and it hasn't been posted so far. I never posted on this forum for this time the CV rework brings me in. There's something that I would like to be considered: I bought some premium CV and honestly so far I'm considering maybe for a refund maybe to stop. Before going into any directions I will of course try the rework and maybe my mind will change. But what I like in CV is the fact that you can control multiple things at the time. It's to have numbers of squads under your control that to me, makes this fun. Now that that it will be a single squad at the time, I don't think I'll still be interested into that. So here's the point: I played only CV since I started this game. I grinded up to t10 all the way and it tooks soooo long (cv is the longest grind because you have to shift to same tier 2 times). So now that I have the Midway I'm just disappointed to see that my only t10 will become unfun to play. I would just think that it would makes it more fair to have a way to get another t10. Take back all my CV if you want I just don't want to grind back from t1 to t10 again without any t10 to enjoy. By this I mean, I would be satisfied to be able to trade CV line for a BB or DD or Cruiser line. Anyway it's not like we (CV main) would win on the trade because, like I said, CV is the longest grind of all. To me it would just be a compensation so that not all the effort of grinding that I put on CV are now none. Thanks for constructive contributions here
  23. For a long time I have been collecting information about certain ships built during, between, and after the world wars that could stand out as candidates for the game that WG is currently presenting to us. I tried to put myself in the head of the developers by deducting the equations from which the HP of each ship are determined based on the displacement of this, although as you will realize some do not agree with those presented in the game. Some branches also present problems related to the location of their ships in the appropriate tier, as is the case of French and Italian destroyers, others such as Japanese cruisers present problems due to unclear information regarding their displacements, and for the case of some aircraft carriers, their HP values are calculated based on their standard displacement and not their full load displacement, as in the case of Kaga. Some ships are not located in the same tier in the file as in the game, that is due to a difference of personal opinions against WG. There are also ships that are not within the branches but are indicated in the tables or under the branches themselves, this is because their location is difficult to decide. The branches are ordered by colors and these include; aircraft carriers, conversions to aircraft carriers, battleships, battle cruisers, large cruisers, cruisers and destroyers. The asterisks represent ships that were invented by the WG development team. The dates indicated in parentheses indicate that the ship is a design that was never built or finished and the year indicates its design date. Do not include ships that belong to classes already mentioned in larger nations, a clear example would be the Argentinian cruiser General Belgrano that is already represented by the Brooklyn class. The different color squares within the HP tables represent tonnages modified by WG referring to an increase in the original tonnage due to a fictitious modernization of the ship. The names of the ships within the HP tables that are centered do not obey the main equation for the class, as it is the case of the large cruises that do not follow the general equation of the cruises and that is why they have their own equation . The same happens with some of the ships converted to aircraft carriers, which due to their excessive displacement, have an equation different from that of the rest of the aircraft carriers. I await your comments and your criticisms. Share it if you consider it appropriate or interesting. It´s not finished yet but i wanted to share it. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1wckrRPErjwJ46erYOaJ1Cx3ycs8AClPx
  24. Hi all, Question and maybe support. Im not sure so I will ask the question first. In the past I have been able to purchase ships from the port with my gold. The only reason I buy it. Today I've been trying to purchase the Enterprise but the system gives an error everytime and says try again later. Will I've tried for several hours now and no luck. Is this a bug, is purchasing ships with gold disallowed now? Thank you for your time and replies. Tarran61
  25. So I've been lamenting not having a high shell-per-minute platform in the French line to work towards the 1789 requirement for Bastille Day and after nugging out the XP required (or so I thought) for the Tier V Emile Bertin, I found that the "Tech Tree" display of the required XP was different than the actual cost. Just thought I'd let you know. Peace!
×