Hey don't forget the Phalanx guns and the NUCLEAR SHELLS for her main guns. They tried to put Sea Sparrow SAMs on too in the 80s but the shock from the main guns was apparently too much for the available launchers. Too bad as that would've significantly improved their air defense capability.

Iowa = Rekt-class

Iowa class, too OP, please nerf.

The Littorio's 381mm guns had a (theorical) maximum range comparable to Yamato's 460mm guns, but they also had a short service life and were pretty innacurate at long range firing (quite a problem since battleships are supposed to outrange their opponents) due excessive shot dispersion.

I want the new foreign battleship to be Richelieu, but I know she might not be axis enough

Rukaroa said:

Iowa class, too OP, please nerf.

Well she did survive till today however seeing that Kancolle is a WW2 game, i think the developers would keep the Iowa class just to their world war 2 era configurations. Like how Yukikaze survived the war but you don't see Tan Yang in the game

MajorAmiruddin said:

Like how Yukikaze survived the war but you don't see Tan Yang in the game

Tasty, tasty Verniy.

When I'm thinking about Kongou's last line....I wonder...if everything just made up, and when we log off, kanmusus and abyssals go to bar and drinking sake together after work done

MajorAmiruddin said:

Well she did survive till today however seeing that Kancolle is a WW2 game, i think the developers would keep the Iowa class just to their world war 2 era configurations. Like how Yukikaze survived the war but you don't see Tan Yang in the game

Ever feel like the Kai-2 update candidates are also decided by the RNGoddess ?

My bet's on Tirpitz

oracle135 said:

My bet's on Tirpitz

Eugene's gonna be jealous.

OOZ662 said:

Tasty, tasty Verniy.

Oh yeah forgot about Verniy. *Gets hit by a empty Vodka bottle*

RIP the Iowa-class dream.

So it's gonna be Italian, huh?

I want Potemkin to be the new foreign ship though

Sooo... no iowa?

TheGreens said:

Sooo... no iowa?

Game breaking stats or none at all.
The only two acceptable choice :)

Mikazuki_Kanata said:

When I'm thinking about Kongou's last line....I wonder...if everything just made up, and when we log off, kanmusus and abyssals go to bar and drinking sake together after work done

That could be case but if you have too OP of a fleet that you will get fed up of playing the game very fast

Yeeeaaah. Richelieu had a bit of an identity crisis after Vichy France was formed. After a while, she and her crew defected to the Allies.

There is still another American Battleship that anyone who Dabbled in ww2 history should know, But I don't think she would get along with Kaga and Akagi.

Seika said:

Game breaking stats or none at all.
The only two acceptable choice :)

Whats wrong with the former?

Since each ship in the game so far has some kind of fault, did any of the Allied ships have any faults in design, equipment, or whatnot? That may balance them to be game candidates.

Reisentanith said:

There is still another American Battleship that anyone who Dabbled in ww2 history should know, But I don't think she would get along with Kaga and Akagi.

Let me guess, it is the one that lies at the bottom of Pearl Harbour in front of the Mighty Mo and her name starts with A?

Rukaroa said:

Since each ship in the game so far has some kind of fault, did any of the Allied ships have any faults in design, equipment, or whatnot? That may balance them to be game candidates.

Their torpedoes were pretty terrible early on, and they couldn't fathom the range Long Lances had, thinking IJN submarines had breached their lines when they got torp'd

But other than that, if we had a USN DD, I'd predict her FP to be near Ayanami or even Yuudachi-tier. AA near Akizuki-tier

Rukaroa said:

Since each ship in the game so far has some kind of fault, did any of the Allied ships have any faults in design, equipment, or whatnot? That may balance them to be game candidates.

Of course they did, but Allied/American ships were relatively modernized so they had fewer (but not zero) issues. (American carriers lacking an armored flight deck being an obvious fault)

^ which, bring the question, will USA players accept stats of American ships getting nerfed for sake of game balance ?

Especially if it's going to be at the same level of the Japanese ships average. After all, can't make all of them as rare ships.

Could balance some through fuel and ammo consumption costs, without necessarily impacting the other stats.

MMaestro said:

Of course they did, but Allied/American ships were relatively modernized so they had fewer (but not zero) issues. (American carriers lacking an armored flight deck being an obvious fault)

I thought not having an armored flight deck was an advantage, allowing Yorktown and the like to be repaired quickly and weather through storms without being peeled like a tin of sardines.

Or just go with the Pokemon Style when obtaining USN Ships, encounter one, fight her, defeat her, don't let her escape then she joins your fleet with no ship sunk.

Mileavis said:

But other than that, if we had a USN DD, I'd predict her FP to be near Ayanami or even Yuudachi-tier. AA near Akizuki-tier

The Sims-class would probably be like the Mutsuki-class, low performance but low resource consumption, perfect for expeditions. The Benson-class doesn't boast a good speed and firepower compare to the Fubuki-class but quite superior in terms survivability. The Gleaves-class will be pretty balance which can be par with the Asashio-class and the Kagerou-class. And the Fletcher-class, they had superior ASW and AA stats but has an average firepower, though they cannot be underestimated especially ships like Nicholas, Radford, O'Bannon, Johnston and Heermann.

Though the ship's stats still varies depending of their performance.

Lunatic6 said:

Or just go with the Pokemon Style when obtaining USN Ships, encounter one, fight her, defeat her, don't let her escape then she joins your fleet with no ship sunk. ...

And to get her, you must have at least one open slot in your line-up! So you're effectively one ship down!

NNescio said:

I thought not having an armored flight deck was an advantage, allowing Yorktown and the like to be repaired quickly and weather through storms without being peeled like a tin of sardines.

Well it did allow carriers to carry more planes and it was easier to build bigger carriers but do not expect them to survive bomb attacks just ask Lady Lex, Yorktown, Franklin and the Grey Ghost (all carriers but the last sank to bombs)

NNescio said:

I thought not having an armored flight deck was an advantage, allowing Yorktown and the like to be repaired quickly and weather through storms without being peeled like a tin of sardines.

It was, but like all things in life, it was a trade-off.

Armored flight decks were REALLY handy against bomb strikes and kamikaze attacks (one direct hit practically knocked the whole ship out of commission), but they -severely- increased the ship's tonnage and (like you said) took longer to repair.

If we ever meet the Iowa-class, I feel like it'd be an abyssal to rekt us hard during an event.

MajorAmiruddin said:

Well it did allow carriers to carry more planes and it was easier to build bigger carriers but do not expect them to survive bomb attacks just ask Lady Lex, Yorktown, Franklin and the Grey Ghost (all carriers but the last sank to bombs)

Franklin did not sink. She was put out of action, but she remained until 1966 before being scrapped.

Yorktown sank from torpedoes from an Japanese submarine.

Lexington from a mix of torpedoes and bombs. She was scuttled by torpedoes.

Hornet was scuttled by Japanese destroyers.

Wasp was sunk by a submarine.

Princeton (the only light carrier the US lost and the only non-escort carrier lost after 1942) was scuttled by torpedoes.

No US aircraft carrier was sunk by diving bombing alone. (not looking at the escort carriers at this time).

MMaestro said:

It was, but like all things in life, it was a trade-off.

Armored flight decks were REALLY handy against bomb strikes and kamikaze attacks (one direct hit practically knocked the whole ship out of commission), but they -severely- increased the ship's tonnage and (like you said) took longer to repair.

Apparently, not even that useful, actually.

SO0 said:

Apparently, not even that useful, actually.

Fair points, but the authors (and editor) included a LOT of caveats to the point that it doesn't come to a logical conclusion.

For one: In the updated version, the author points out the fact that (part of) the decision was based on the belief that they would take action in the Mediterranean Sea (which they did), but then contrasts it with the action in the Pacific. Comparing the pressure the Italian/German air forces put on the RN in the Mediterranean, compared to the pressure the IJN put on the USN in the build up to the invasion of the Japanese home islands, is a blatantly unfair comparison.

We need Freddy to update the Littorio Silhouette.

LucasHidemiKomori said:

The Littorio's 381mm guns had a (theorical) maximum range comparable to Yamato's 460mm guns, but they also had a short service life and were pretty innacurate at long range firing (quite a problem since battleships are supposed to outrange their opponents) due excessive shot dispersion.

This was partly due to the uneven quality of the shells, which had an excessive tolerance (as per the contract's clauses) when built (as much as 1%). This meant that, even a 1 kg variance could cause deviations of as much as 160 meters at a distance of 27'000 meters.

This was sometimes corrected by the fire directors, which tried to use similar shells for each salvo. So, in some circumstances these battleships fired quite well, and their salvoes were not as wide as normall thought.

I live 25 minutes away from Iowa and I've yet to go on board.

Hey, I just noticed.

Germany: Schleswig-Holstein class.

Seriously?

Historynerd said:

Hey, I just noticed.

Germany: Schleswig-Holstein class.

Seriously?

Well its not like they had a lot of battleships after 1919. The "pocket battleships" are actually armored cruisers by German records even though they were built to replace the old pre-dreadnought battleships in some respects to treaties.

And two those old girls did fight in the war. Older than even Kongo.

ithekro said:

Well its not like they had a lot of battleships after 1919. The "pocket battleships" are actually armored cruisers by German records even though they were built to replace the old pre-dreadnought battleships in some respects to treaties.

And two those old girls did fight in the war. Older than even Kongo.

I know, but could they actually be considered battleships? A good heavy cruiser could probably deal with one of them.

They did fight, but in largely secondary roles; they couldn't even fight on an even basis against the old Baltic Fleet battleships!

MMaestro said:

Fair points, but the authors (and editor) included a LOT of caveats to the point that it doesn't come to a logical conclusion.

For one: In the updated version, the author points out the fact that (part of) the decision was based on the belief that they would take action in the Mediterranean Sea (which they did), but then contrasts it with the action in the Pacific. Comparing the pressure the Italian/German air forces put on the RN in the Mediterranean, compared to the pressure the IJN put on the USN in the build up to the invasion of the Japanese home islands, is a blatantly unfair comparison.

Mileavis said:

Their torpedoes were pretty terrible early on, and they couldn't fathom the range Long Lances had, thinking IJN submarines had breached their lines when they got torp'd

But other than that, if we had a USN DD, I'd predict her FP to be near Ayanami or even Yuudachi-tier. AA near Akizuki-tier

Thing was it wasn't the load out it was the weapon, and not even the weapons performance really, but rather it's defects. If it had worked as designed the Mark 14/15 were basically equivalent to any other navies torpedoes besides the Long Lance. That fact is often kind of lost in the shuffle I find, namely that a working Mark 14/15 was roughly equivalent in performance to basically every other naval torpedo in use, but the USN had the misfortune to be fighting the one nation it wasn't equivalent too. This was also why the USN for quite awhile underestimated the Type 93 because they knew that and assumed Japanese torpedoes should be roughly equivalent too.

It seems unlikely that Kancolle would model the early war defects (Suisei aren't constantly falling out of the sky because Japan can't into liquid cooled engines for instance) so this would be largely moot. As it was the US DDs had more tubes then basically any foreign designs besides Japanese ships (if you include reloads) some pre-war ships having up to sixteen tubes with ten being standard during the war, but the torpedo itself wasn't outstanding. This would be rather like penalizing Japanese ships in firepower because they had shitastic shells though (which they did, the diving shell concept was a horrible one that badly reduced effectiveness)

The irony is the USN had a torpedo second only to the Type 93 that was nearly ready for production in late 1941, but they decided not to retool the factory and to focus on massing what they had in anticipation of the looming war. That better model was restarted toward the end of the war as the capability of enemy torpedoes finally became known, but by then there wasn't a hell of allot left to torpedo and none of the 450 units completed was issued. The Mark 17 could reach about 16.5km at 46 knots (presumably further at a lower speed setting) using a new peroxide based fuel if it HAD been issued it would've largely evened out torpedo capabilities, and of course Kancolle is riddled with experimental equipment that was never actually used so...

Lunatic6 said:
The Sims-class would probably be like the Mutsuki-class, low performance but low resource consumption, perfect for expeditions.

Haha, no.

All of the late 30s US DD would be roughly equivalent to the Hatsuharu and Shiratsuyu. This is no shock given they were built at the same time within the same limits. They all basically crammed four to five 5/38 guns aboard and varying arrangements of between eight and sixteen(!) torpedo tubes combined with high speeds, some managing over 40 knots at trial displacement.

The equivalents of the Mutsuki would be the swarm of old Four Pipers, these weren't quite as good as the former, but they were fairly close. A few of the more famous ones might be worth adding as expedition mules way, WAY down the line but overall they'd be pretty marginal just like the Mutsuki are.

The Benson-class doesn't boast a good speed and firepower compare to the Fubuki-class but quite superior in terms survivability. The Gleaves-class will be pretty balance which can be par with the Asashio-class and the Kagerou-class.

The Benson is basically the exact same ship as the Gleaves just built at a different yard with different suppliers, both are actually somewhat faster then the Japanese DDs having about the same HP but weighing less. The firepower is also deceptive as the 5/38 had almost twice the effective fire rate of the 5/50 with a shell of basically the same size (slightly larger burster actually), but slightly less range. Within effective range it's gun power is actually superior to any Japanese DD based on that rate of fire, that gun is also a true DP weapon meaning it's AA firepower it massively superior to any Japanese DD bar Akizuki (though arguably still better due a superior fire control system, Mk.37 craps all over even the fantasy installations in Kancolle). It carried one more torpedo tube that Fubuki and most of those had lost all but one reload by the outbreak of war as weight savings (12 torpedoes on board) so torpedo power is roughly equal (assuming the Benson gets to mount better later war torpedoes), the later special DDs retained full torpedo reloads though and so had 16 aboard and should have thus have a somewhat higher torp stat.

And the Fletcher-class, they had superior ASW and AA stats but has an average firepower,

Thanks to the much higher rate of fire the Fletcher outguns any Japanese DD ever built by a wide margin at common battle ranges. Really Fletcher would be equal to superior in just about every single aspect besides total torpedoes aboard to any Japanese DD if given the Mark 17. The Sumner class ships crap all over everything, in terms of AA I'd take one of them over Akizuki and their shells were still full sized five inch weapons and they retained a full ten tube torpedo battery, and double rudders made them much more agile then older ships. They were a bit slow due to the added weight on a similiar hull to earlier ships, but only about as slow as Akizuki and still viable.

That said this is really only the case with the USN, the USN and Japan built DDs that were pretty much leaps and bounds above anyone else, nothing else actually used in the war in any numbers even came close to these two in well rounded general purpose designs. The British DD were a hodgepodge, but even the best ones were only maybe equal to a Gleave or Shiratsuyu on balance. France built a few huge and fast DD, but these had almost no AA capability. German DDs were in someways similiar but not that fast, very short ranged, and badly handling due to cramming too much on a small hull. Italy never had any outstanding DD designs and most of the Russia ships were fairly hopeless unimpressive and lacking even DP weapons. The Dutch DD by the time of the war were all older and basically equivalent to Mutsuki.

Now that I think about it, the Iowa class's mid-80's refit makes about as much sense as a Knight in Shining Armor getting on his trusty steed and charging into battle with a lance and an assault rifle.

Eboreg said:

Now that I think about it, the Iowa class's mid-80's refit makes about as much sense as a Knight in Shining Armor getting on his trusty steed and charging into battle with a lance and an assault rifle.

This Knight has Tomahawks and drones for gunnery spotting.

She's coming. The Mk.7 has been added to the game.

panzerfan said:

She's coming. The Mk.7 has been added to the game.

Yes. All my Yes.

My guess is they'll more or less give her only the WWII-era vintage gears. Drone spotter and Tomahawk cruise missiles is a bit OP, even if we were to pit her up against Re-class.

AdventZero said:

Yes. All my Yes.

My guess is they'll more or less give her only the WWII-era vintage gears. Drone spotter and Tomahawk cruise missiles is a bit OP, even if we were to pit her up against Re-class.

They're also developing a radar activated artillery spotting FCS with the gun so it can only go up from here.

panzerfan said:

She's coming. The Mk.7 has been added to the game.

I'd personally be more excited to have the USS Washington added.

-Stupidly high luck from never taking a single casualty to enemy fire.
-Dangerous in night battles.
-Strong AA.
-Powerful guns.
-Interesting Relationship with the Kongou sisters

USS Phoenix would also be interesing, as she was present at Pearl Harbor, taking only a couple bullets from strafing but no casualties, and only suffered a near miss which caused two casualties on board later in her career. She saw every major battle, including the Battle of Surigao Straight.

poil333 said:
USS Phoenix would also be interesing, as she was present at Pearl Harbor, taking only a couple bullets from strafing but no casualties, and only suffered a near miss which caused two casualties on board later in her career. She saw every major battle, including the Battle of Surigao Straight.

Well that and the fact that she end up serving in Argentinian Navy...till she got sunk by British nuclear sub...using WW2 torpedo. LOL.

onyhow said:

Well that and the fact that she end up serving in Argentinian Navy...till she got sunk by British nuclear sub...using WW2 torpedo. LOL.

I barely consider that to be same vessel. Perhaps in steel it was, but in spirit Phoenix's soul refused to leave the US for a nation with a quasi-fascist government. My personal explanation for why her famous luck failed.

LucasHidemiKomori said:

The Littorio's 381mm guns had a (theorical) maximum range comparable to Yamato's 460mm guns, but they also had a short service life and were pretty innacurate at long range firing (quite a problem since battleships are supposed to outrange their opponents) due excessive shot dispersion.

To outrange a Battleship's main guns was wishful thinking at best. The reality of WWII was that a range in excess of 30.000m was pretty useless. Hits at more than 20.000m were a matter of luck, and the battleship's guns can hit consistently only at less than 16,000m.
IE, in the battle of Denmark Strait, the Prince of Wales opened fire at 24.300m (missing the Bismark of amazingly 1500m), and hit the Bismark with its 6th (19.340m), 9th (16.690m) and 13th(14.770m) salvos (then missing all the others till the 21th and last). The Bismark opened fire only at 20.000m and hit the Hood with its 5th(15.700m)salvo, then hit the PoW with its 8th (15.300m), 9th (15.300m) and 10th (15.500m) salvos (then missing the last three, when the distance increased and the ship begun to maneuver for a torpedo alarm).
The Hood fired 10 salvos, from 22.500 to 14.000m, on the Prinz Eugen, with no hits at all.

Finally, the "excessive shot dispersion" of the Italian 381s is one of those thing that become true on internet due to the fact that many repeat it. In reality, in tests, the dispersion of the Littorio Class guns was on par, or only marginally worse, than that of the most accurate battleships of its time (around 2% of the range at +20.000m compared with the 1.9% of the Iowa for example), thats an exceptional result, given that the projectile with the flatter trajectory should have a greater orizontal dispersion for purely geometrical reasons.
Its true that they had a reduced barrel life (around 1/2 than slower firing guns), but which WWII Battelship came close to shot 140 shells for gun? Besides, the Littorios were equipped for the fast barrel change.

There's no need for game balance now that Iowa is actually in the game, that American hero blasts everything and anything away.

MentallyUnstable said:

There's no need for game balance now that Iowa is actually in the game, that American hero blasts everything and anything away.

Resource consumption, my man. There's a reason why the Yamatos often stay at home and it applies to Iowa as well.

Tk3997 said:

Hey don't forget the Phalanx guns and the NUCLEAR SHELLS for her main guns. They tried to put Sea Sparrow SAMs on too in the 80s but the shock from the main guns was apparently too much for the available launchers. Too bad as that would've significantly improved their air defense capability.

Also they tried to computerize New Jersey's Main guns but apparently the computers couldn't accurately hit a target. So to our USNF, the moral of this is if it ain't broke don't fix or spend millions/or billions trying to make it better.

Well... all nations had their Battleships implemented as of now and the only one this comic didn't get right was Vanguard.

Nope, they went for Warspite instead. (which was an excellent decision in my mind)

BelchingSpitfire said:

Well she did survive till today however seeing that Kancolle is a WW2 game, i think the developers would keep the Iowa class just to their world war 2 era configurations. Like how Yukikaze survived the war but you don't see Tan Yang in the game

yet

I am from the future and I would like to say your prediction is spot on!