sRuLe

TB is a same... a destroyer. But earlier era, WW1 and pre-WW1.

Answer is given.

Yorcktown max is 82 planes, Essex - 85 planes, Enterprise - 80.... okay Midway 95 planes and at least 40 of them is, Hellcats or Bearcats, and only the rest are TBD Devastators(payload max 700kg) or SBD Dauntless(payload max 1080kg). What a Hellcat payload is? Oh dear... 1025kg same as Bearcat, Mark7 16" shell - 1200kg,Yamato's 18,1" shell even heavier - 1460kg. Max plane in flight operation for a carrier, 42. From which just a half is strike force what means 20 tons max against 22 tons of guaranteed steel from BB. Hit accuracy rate - 11,8% against 18% of an BB's heavy armament. Plus to that... poor overall protection, high weather dependency, high target detection dependency, high risk of target detection interruption, high chance of weapon deploy interruption in all parts of payload delivery path. ARE YOU SERIOUS?

You meant increased rate of "detonation"? Am-I-rite?))) Just pop-out of a combat in safe distance, like about 20km(12 miles), load a pipe and dive again. That's how usually DD's do... and definitely not loading an 600 kilos of explosives under heavy enemy fire. Am-I-rite? Than we need kind a none safe zone circle in game, when you come out of it, your torps began to reload/freezing timer.

I mostly agreed with all you said EXCEPT this part. And you know why... In modern attempts of history review people talking about War on a Pacific, which no doubt have a great naval battles as a part of a naval history. But, it wasn't a Main Part. And wasn't a start at all. Just let's spin the ball and go back where it starts, Atlantic theatre. And the main class of torpedo warfare of an whole XX century - A submarine Warfare. Designed as a stealthy weapon both sub and the torps very fast become an First Encounter Weapon, what means that torpedo is an major naval assault weapon. And often torpedo was used to make one single deadly shot as they actually often DID. And if we dig into earlier examples like Russian-Japanese War, there also torpedo was an first strike/impact weapon. Simply looking on tonnage sunk by "torpedo fire" historically best effectiveness rate will explosively rise from 2,5% up to 41% or even more. Cause during the war, there is no "civil tonnage" at all. So unfortunately if you guys will dig deeper you found out that except NERF we need a BUFF. And that would be historically correct.

Type 7A and Type 7M destroyers actually can, but torpedo reload where mostly manual... and probably only in "out of combat" situation. If you are looking for arguments to hold your ground take a look on Storozhevoi and later Novik classes, G and V-class German Destroyers and US destroyers Clemson-Class. Due to light and compact torpedoes they had, and where designed to be able reload T-Tubes during combat. Other examples are only Italian and French destroyers since Jaguar/Vauquelin and Le Fantasque class. Oh yeah.... those lads CAN.

Before we all continue to gently throw a poo on a fan pointing it at each other... let's firstly make an analysis of a Perfect Torpedo Destroyer in theory and how would it work on practice in all kind of circumstances. Just let's be honest... tonnage sunk by torpedoes in WW2 are slightly much greater than by any other type of naval weapons including aerial bombardment due massive damage to floatage.

(U KNOW THAT INSTEAD OF WORDS HERE MUST BE WELL KNOWN OWL)

Actually not, it's a torpedo cruiser-destroyer. And never where a DD. Difference between TB and MTB is same as between Lamborghini Diablo and Fiat Punto. Torpedo Boat - is a name of mostly Whitehead Torpedo armed destroyers where torpedoes are main armament and which designed to "dive" on a group of ships in open sea to make torpedo soup . MTB - is just a motor torpedo boat for coastal operation only.

We not talking theory... we talking practice, we talking - Jutland, sir.

Huh... effectiveness, I think they mean: - Q Quantity. As more as merrier. 🎃

Let's start with": a) Amount of torpedoes in salvo b) Operational range c) ...see IJN Shimakaze 🎃

1st... in WoWS despite their "balancing" mechanics U still can pent through the "roof" tried on all levels. But about "how" I'll shush. Angling can benefit but... most of your ship structure made from just constructive hardened steel from 20 to 50mm, which just don't stop even 11" APC/CPC shell due shell's weight, speed (sum of it called - "shell drag", don't know does it correct name on english). Otherways made whole ship from one solid peace of steel, or angling just don't work. Plus to that AP shell entering an constructive steel just literally "fix&hold" it's angle... and start "bitching around" inside of ship internals.

Hope not, we already got limited design in DD/TB and CL. I'm not talking about such "weirdos"like i-400. But, actually fine ocean going sub with tremendous fire power can and must be allowed to be done.

HMS Lion, HMS Tiger, SMS Derflinger, SMS Seydlitz, SMS Moltke.... and finally HMS Hood and KMS Bismark got ROF 2,1-2,8 shots per minute. On practice... first engagement shots probably ll'be around 1 shot/min due fire correction issues... but that, hell brakes loose. Totally, IRL, I mean it!

- No one shall pass!

- More funds mean more battleships! (c) Pentagon

+ To you. Btw Yamato is the WORST examp of armoring the ship. From the side, looks cool... but it's side view. And what we have... Take a look on a deck and belt "connection". Single long range hit, and deck blown into, it just don't lean on a belt upper side, just "hangs" in the air(support structures). For the close range encounters main belt are just too high, asking for penetration.

Nice statistics...but,can we see an amount of hits, and hit "by what" on both sides capital ships? Cause I got serious doubts about Campell's calculation.

SMS Derflinger than or SMS Moltke... there is so many exceptions that "rule" look more exceptions as real so called "exceptions".

Sloped armor on the ships is bit different than on tanks... due to difference of an ballistic ark, on ships it's more steeper.

Man, can't tell HOW I Agree with ya. What ever you have, radar, sonar, satellite dish popping out of a butt... all over 16-18 miles are just the same as shooting down the Moon with a firework. Depends on a shell weight. If its Heavy APC/CPC, the ballistic arc mostly land a shell into a poor armored deck... and 'ere we go.

HMS Warspite disagree with ya... ad there I see a nose of KMS Bismarck popping around the corner to get ya an chew. Actually there is the web is some USS New Mexico and Nevada exercise schemes of a shots landing, dispersion an range to target. And these "ladies" hardly can be called - Inaccurate. If I found, I'll post em.

Actually we need to split some WWl and WWII, at least not allowing throwing an pre-dreadnought against Yamato. Or might be not...