Please give both Nevada and Arizone their historical Rate of Fire

It has baffled the naval community in War Thunder that the US standards in the game arnt given their peak rate of fire like other nations have. The battleships doesnt have magically overperforming SAP shells and their AP are consistently rated meh with its good penetration performance let down bh its explosive filler.

So whats so special about american 14 inch that has them forced into the longest rate of fire of all the capital ships?


The official stance is that because of “only” two hoists are feeding 3 guns, it cannot get any faster.


American 14-inch battleships have a problem of main propellant hoist not directly linked to turret(They have stopped at the outside of turret and moved to turret by sub hoist using human power), and as Magiaconatus saids, only two hoistss are feeding 3 guns. Actually, lots of sources saids that reload speed of US standard battleships as 45~50 seconds. Gaijin gives what they could give best.


There’re so many wrong observations here. First of all SAP had been nerfed significantly since the major update a year ago and becomes pretty much irrelevant, second post pen effect of AP is primarily determined by the shell’s KE, not weight of explosive fillers, and US 14in AP is certainly a beneficiary under this system. Again this stands as a perfect example of parroting misinformation spread by the not so intelligent while loud-voice big talkers.

And as others have said above, according to information we have so far the early US 14in turrets have slower reload rate than average designs due to several design flaws.


Excuse me, i’ve recently started returning to naval so perhaps what I held as true before is now obselete. Most ive heard is that HE spam isnt as strong as before and my previous conversations has led me to believe that SAP dominance is still a thing.

Ill accept that i’m wrong here, and thank everyone for clearing misconceptions.

1 Like

In my experience AP>SAP>HE but it’s still situational to a degree. Even the laughable Kronshtadt HE shells don’t perform well anymore against anything cruiser sized or larger. The “real shatter” effects are a joke. SAP still seems to do well if you are worried about overpenetration or not fusing properly.

I am basing this totally off of experience and not technical data, so please tell me if I’m wrong here.


I think the main issue is the amount of SAP that the helena’s use to put down range since that is basically all anyone faced it was a pretty short and annoying match for most players, the other ships likely suffered because of this.

with the amount of helena’s somewhat decreasing so to has the SAP spam, or at least ive seen far less of it today, that might just be the new anti botting taking effect though, but ive seen more techtree ship in 3 battles then i use to in a week.

You can read about the abysmal RoF on Navweapons - seems to be reality - sorry about that!


1 Like

NavWeps also mentions Nevada getting access to a 680kg heavy AP shell and a 578kg HC shell during the 1930’s, never mind 1944.


Which is probably something you can ask for through suggestions or wherever the “historical loadout” request system is now, but this thread is specifically about the rate of fire.

1 Like

Why, so they can send it to the paper shredder for years after being “Passed to the devs for consideration”?

There are suggestions made into improvements all the time - almost every minor update has something that has been reported or suggested by players.

1 Like

Not if its an American vehicle. Unless its something like removing its stabilizer, in which case Gaijin will get right on it.

1 Like

Cynicism might be understandable, but it is not reality.


But do you think the “official stance” is correct and consistent with other ships’ standards?

I believe that’s already been reported, back when Nevada came out.

Just so you know, NavWeaps isn’t always correct.

By all means let them know if they are wrong on this - I’m sure they will actually appreciate more accurate info, so be sure to include the reference so they can attribute it. (seriously)

Oh I’m sure Mag and HK(or Tony if you meant NavWeaps and not WT) have referenced all the books and documents they can already. I don’t have anything to add to this particular issue of the early US 14-inch guns’ RoF. I was just pointing out what I said literally, that NavWeaps isn’t always correct on everything.

1.75 rounds per minute would be a 35 second reload: however, full crew + aced reload ingame is currently 40 seconds.

Arizona and Nevada could perfectly get a 5 second reload buff, and they would still be in the historical range and slower than any other BB ingame, but at least they would become more playable.