IJN amagi command tower issue // Gaijin.net // Issues
They don’t even know what an armored command tower is. After turning the command tower into a pavilion, they asked me for “proof materials” and called the issue “not a bug”
Look at the ‘command tower’ they made. If the command tower of a warship really looks like this, there’s no need to put any armor on it. All the shells can fly in through the windows and kill all the fleet commanders!
And then Gaijin actually thought it was correct! Players need to ‘submit materials’ to fix it! I think next time they can try to lose the frontal armor of a tank and put it in the game, and require players to prove the existence of the frontal armor, otherwise it will be’ not a bug '.
There have been a couple of sources linked in the comments, and although they do not really show the bridge in great detail, they do I believe state that it is supposed to be similar to if not the same as the Nagato.
Even today Warship bridges and vulnerable areas have some degree of armour protection. Its rarely dedicated armour plates (though they do exist) but rather kevlar xirtains and panels and bullet proof windows as the main threat is now from rapid fire low calibre weapons, rpgs etc.
All ‘gun age’ vessels would have been more concerned with larger calibres and the mass amounts of potential shrapnel. Even open bridges werent easy targets for direct fire.
Like yes it’d be nice to have it modeled correctly but you can’t be surprised you made a bug report with no sources and then they asked for sources.
Especially since its not a given that ships had heavily armored conning towers.
There was a trend of commanders directing from outside the tower for better visibility which lead to the KGV class ditching heavy armor for their conning tower entirely for 4" max which was enough to protect from splinters and the lighter weight let them elevate it higher further increasing visibility.
What if the model was accurate and the armor on it was a bug or it was correct and the commanders just really wanted a mix of protection and visibility?
We need to know a fact that the Japanese never requested such a huge observation window on the command tower after entering the era of dreadnoughts, which is consistent. （The hierarchical system of the Japanese Navy makes it almost impossible for their battleship captains to demand that shipbuilding technicians change their designs according to their ideas like you mentioned）From the earliest purchase of the Kongo class battlecruiser from Britain to their final construction of the largest battleship in history, the Yamato, all Japanese battleships during this period had thick armored command towers with only small observation slots. Naval warfare is different from land warfare. The commanders on battleships do not only have one bridge to use. In daily situations where good visibility is needed, there are spacious and bright navigation bridges to use. Armored command towers only become the command positions of senior officials on board during intense artillery battles. Therefore, whether considering historical consistency or realism, as a continuation of the Japanese Navy’s shipbuilding philosophy, the Amagi class battlecruiser should not have such a huge command tower window.
