Haha, I’m no malicious, dude. But like the other country’s tech-tree, seems like the best way to prepare Iowa and Bismark is research all the top-tier ships. In historic , Nevada actually succeeded by Arizona, but in Gaijin’s tech-tree, they are in the different branch. So the answer is apparently, research all the ships!
1 Like
I agree, since the armor bug was fixed, American BB survivability was definitely improved. But their mag still can be explosion by the ammo which is higher than water line. And the 40s reloading time cause they are difficult to hit the target’s weakpoint , if the target position is constantly changing.
1 Like
Maryland is on the reliable-leak-list for this patch (and was expected very soon even without that, as the devs have been steadily adding US battleships in class order).
2 Likes
16" guns are nice, but we will get stuck with 1.5 RPM fire rate on them so it will be another boring U.S. battleship that will get eaten alive.
1 Like
RPM is an important stat. I remember putting my Graf Spee permanently into the hangar, just cause of its bad ROF. At the beginn I was excited…yay such a huge calibre on a heavy cruiser hull :)
This will surely wreck, or not?
Ofc not. Its counterbalanced by bad precision and very long reload rates. Any light cruiser with 15cm tripple turrets applies much more damage. You can just pepper the target constantly and shells land where you aim. While gameplay with big guns looks like shot…no hit…waaaaaiiiiiit fooor reeeload…miss gain. Just terribad.
1 Like
My bad, i thought you were attacking me because I asked for something unrealistic, I’m sorry. I’m an Air Player so I really have no idea how far away we are from the Iowa haha, is it as unrealistic as the F-22 getting added next patch lol
They accepted but didn’t implement the report I made on the 14” guns. The sources I used cover the 16”/45 also so I intend to make one for the Colorados when one comes to game. With much more powerful ships coming to game I hope it will be enough to get them to actually do something about it.
2 Likes
Good luck. I’m convinced that, after the debacle with the Dunkerque shells, you could literally resurrect the designer, the captain, and the entire crew and Gaijin wouldn’t accept them as reliable sources.
We’re more likely to see Iowa next patch than the F-22. But that’s like saying we’re more likely to see the F-22 in two patches instead of next patch.
By the end of the year or first patch of the year after, for sure.
There’s a very good chance it stays in “passed as a suggestion” hell forever, but at least they didn’t go back with the “not a bug” within a day of accepting it like they did to the poor French. I still have hope/cope
1 Like
They think Mutsu is the ultimate evolution of the Kongo design or something like that. I’m pretty sure their source, if they even use one, was printed in Moscow sometime around 1940 (which is why they’re so wrong) and they view it as the naval equivalent of the Holy Bible.
So its a good luck to anyone in regards to getting anything changed.
1 Like
Tbh , it is not because they think it is the peak evolution , especially talking about a ship that didn’t even see combat. More like about the way they designed the mode as a whole and the way the TT work. Cause with the system of TT we have as of now , that one of the many way to put her there, even if it doesn’t make sense. The dev kinda dig themself a hole when they designed the tech tree that way and the only way out is basically an overhaul of the entire thing. Cause we gonna have anti ship missile and what not , with the current system , it just gonna be after the BBs
That doesn’t work because they could have, and should have, put Mutsu after Fuso as they knew they were going to add Amagi two patches later. They did it entirely because Mutsu has 4 turrets, and Kongo has 4 turrets. And Amagi follows Ise because they both have more than 4 turrets.
That was their implication in the Mutsu devblog.
PLUS, they actually have three lines in the Japanese tree, two “battleship” lines and a dedicated battlecruiser line. They even correctly identified each ship as battleship and battlecruiser respectively. At best they don’t care, at worst they’re being intentionally dense.
Thank God we’re not going to have to worry about missiles for a while. Submarines are likely to plague us this year, but at least one cancer has been delayed for a while.
Tbh, I’m more worried about the ridiculously high drafts the Standards use. Tennessee as a fine example of being questionably vulnerable.
Who knows if this trend contiues in North Carolina and up.
That a can of worm , I can see we ( the naval playerbase) gonna have to open up soon enough. If not the first , then the latter will be opened up
Still I do want them to at least fix the whole thing before adding anything tho. Cause by god the current naval is bad
Aye. We’ve been begging them for any real changes to improve the mode pretty much since it came out.
We’ll be lucky if we even get longer ranged maps to go with our modern battleships.
We really don’t need any changes to the current mode setup beyond QoL stuff like spawning a bit further away from teammates so you can actually turn.
They seem to use the generally very optimistic design water line while setting statcard mass closer to full or even emergency load conditions. However from what plans I’ve seen the design waterline on the fast battleships is generally several feet or more deeper, and I believe there’s more easily accessible information about what draft a ship had at a given displacement, which I’d think would help in reporting.
1 Like
Thankfully.
At least for the US fast BBs they all have ridiculously thick barbette and turret armor. Very important when all their shells are stored there
That will mostly help fighting Scharnhorst, almost any treaty peer will still blow clean through at regular in game ranges. Accounting for the RCA modifier the North Carolina’s barbette will be a touch under 450mm equivalent, while the South Dakota’s would be around 480mm. Certainly significant armor but inside 15km that’s only really good against less capable ships, and won’t stand up to most peer guns. Only exception is likely to be KGV which they might block at around 10km or so.
1 Like