SpardaSon21

That resistance bonus is whack. What's really hilarious is that the bonus applies regardless of whatever the incoming shell is, so you get 1900's Austro-Hungarian pre-dreads that can soak up multiple 20" shells. I'm honestly surprised the US isn't the best for that. The US has historically been ahead of the curve for ship design and construction, after all. The South Carolinas had better internals than Dreadnought herself and both them and the later Delawares were standouts for their all-centerline armament, handling the keel stress from that quite well. Later on all our treaty designs had high-tensile STS all over to reduce weight while keeping or even adding to integrity since it was quite superior to the usual structural steels and doubled as high-hardness homogenous armor.

Na. The St. Louis class hull shape is applicable for it and the Pennsylvania armored cruisers. USS Milwaukee, a St. Louis-class cruiser. U USS Pennsylvania, lead ship of her class: You'd need a new design for the Tennessee classes though given their greatly improved gun placement and armor schemes.

US casemate designs. I want my St. Louis and Omaha designs with casemate main armament guns, and the New York classes and their 21 5" casements. I'm mildly offended I can't put the quite historical firepower armament on US designs of that era. The Connecticut-class pre-dreads had 12 7" casemates and 4 twin 8" turrets, 2 per side, for example.

Is there any chance the US Navy's Explosive D will be added and properly represented with the powder/filler updates? Reduced damage since it was weak as far as fillers go (roughly 0.95x of TNT), but exceptionally stable for greater pen and reduced detonation and fire chances. Poudre B should also appear quite early in the tech trees as an ~1890 invention!