HOME | DD

TK9871 In reply to locomanic5297 [2019-03-01 07:58:08 +0000 UTC]

Still ongoing, my friend!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

locomanic5297 In reply to TK9871 [2019-03-01 14:08:45 +0000 UTC]

Nice. But have any idea when the next step in the series is coming soon? If I may ask you?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

TK9871 In reply to locomanic5297 [2019-03-02 15:48:40 +0000 UTC]

Next chapter's draft is halfway finished, though I won't be able to make final adjustments until after I'm finished with school work, so expect the next chapters later on this month!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

locomanic5297 In reply to TK9871 [2019-03-03 04:42:25 +0000 UTC]

OOOH! I can't wait!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

TK9871 In reply to snitchpogi12 [2017-04-11 12:37:19 +0000 UTC]

Weeeell this is based off my fanfic so *SPOILERS* in that Missouri is the first shipgirl, so the US promotes her more.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

snitchpogi12 In reply to TK9871 [2017-04-11 23:25:29 +0000 UTC]

Ah ok.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

TK9871 In reply to Chaos-Craft999 [2017-01-16 14:15:04 +0000 UTC]

I was actually thinking of implementing India, but I don't really know if I can right now.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

amirrrrruuuddddddiin In reply to Chaos-Craft999 [2017-01-14 12:11:24 +0000 UTC]

I know you wrote this for fun. But there are a few problems with several of the replacements you suggested.

For the US Navy: Gerald R. Ford class can't be consider as it hasn't even started to even serve the Navy.
For the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force: Same case with the Gerald R. Ford and come on, would the Japanese honestly pass the chance to bring the Yamato back?
For the Russian Navy: The Sovetsky Soyuz class can't be summoned as one, they were never even finished, let alone serve.
For the German Navy: Refer to Sovetsky Soyuz comment. If it ain't built, it can't be summoned more so if it was a just a paper boat. (Not even started building)
For the French Navy: Charles de Gaulle is already summoned, look at the girl on the left hand bottom corner.
For the Royal Navy: The Queen Elizabeth II class are still being constructed so they are out and Lion was cancelled so they are out too.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Chaos-Craft999 In reply to amirrrrruuuddddddiin [2017-01-14 13:10:50 +0000 UTC]

Liaoning didnt do any massive work, so why add liaoning if not allow izumo or gerard r ford?

The h class was laid down "but" was already awarded while not doing anything.

Sovietsky soyuz wasnt awarded but what i was refering was to put their future pride even if not finished.

Yamato and musashi "Failed" to prove theirself, i liked these battleships but they already released their true potentials, the uss johnstone(a teeny-tiny destroyer)survived alot of massive yamato shells and was stuck inside.
So Akagi or nagato would be the one to replace yamato instead.

Lion was the british yamato. to be honest, it was almost close for them to lay down one, but vanguard was laid down instead, vanguard is still a sub class and mini-me of lion just to decrease construction time.
Also their, queen elizabeth cv was built last two years ago, it will be comissioned this year anytime soon. Also what do you mean by Queen elizabeth "II"?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

amirrrrruuuddddddiin In reply to Chaos-Craft999 [2017-01-14 15:03:42 +0000 UTC]

Well, if you looked to what he wrote in the details, he said  and I quote "The ships must have been in service for at least a half a year (for the Soul Converter to work)" therefore, when I was reviewing what you had wrote based on what he said. So that is why I wrote what I wrote. For example:

Well Liaoning has been serving much longer than the Izumo, since 2012 compared to Izumo which started 2015 while the Gerald Ford class have yet to serve. Now let's take Gerald Ford out of the picture as she is not even commissioned yet so that means not in service yet, now we have Liaoning which is an actual aircraft carrier and we have Izumo which is in all the sense of the word, a helicopter carrier (Though it can be argued that she can operate V-TOL aircraft). However this means Izumo is rather limited in their capabilities to conduct offensive operations unlike Liaoning.l

The H-class was never built to begin with and there is no sources to say that they were even laid down.

The Sovetsky Soyuz class battleships were laid down and were under construction however none of them were above 25 per cent construction when World War 2 started and they were all scrapped after the war and since they were never commissioned, that means they never served.

Now for the Yamato class and your comment about the Johnston, let me remind you that Johnston was straddled or had close impacts from Yamato's guns. A Fletcher like Johnston won't stand against many DIRECT hits from Yamato's 18 inch guns. Also the one shell that did go into Johnston but didn't kill her, failed because at that point of the engagement, Johnston was already low on fuel which meant there was little for the shell to ignite. Also you said that about the Yamato class but honestly, all the battleships built just prior or during World War 2 never got to unleash their full potential as carriers and air power took over.

Now for Lion, well it is the same case with Sovetsky Soyuz but at an even worse position as only her keel was laid so she too can't be included as she has yet to serve unlike Hood who has served over 20 years. And the II was a mistake, I kinda mistaken the carrier for the cruise ship but even for the carriers, they can't be represented as they have yet to serve.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Chaos-Craft999 In reply to amirrrrruuuddddddiin [2017-01-15 00:48:28 +0000 UTC]

yamato's gun incapitated all of jonston's guns but what about the small amount fuel? Detonation would be responsible, not the shell.
Yamato's flak 25mm aag was inferior, which tells us its weak against aircraft, yeah it took 5-9 carriers but what about musashi? All those 5-9 carriers didnt launched all their aircraft because they all carry +90 airwings.
Yamati did kill two escort carriers but how much shell did it took to kill a puny escort carriers? The 3 were heavily damaged and onky two got wrecked.

You need to read encyclopedia, the first two or h39 and h41 was laid down but not continued when efforts were moved on U-boats instead.

Lion has a very cheap sub-class, the vanguard. It may not considered sub-class because it has a major difference but it has the same architecture applied on it.

Well i didnt know you were refering to a cruise liner but i also have the same thing that happens to me.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

amirrrrruuuddddddiin In reply to Chaos-Craft999 [2017-01-15 08:29:02 +0000 UTC]

Well for the Yamato's AA, well it is bad, you have to remember that there planes from 9 carriers which were not all torpedo bombers but there were also dive bombers and fighters and this divided the amount of AA fire she could put out. For Musashi, she had worse AA than Yamato in her final voyage as she had far fewer AA guns so her AA fire per area was worse.

Now for the comment about the Battle off Samar, please remember that you can't hit on your first try when firing naval guns because in your first salvo, you are basically guessing, it is only with your following salvos is when you start hitting the target. Think of it as sniping a target down range and all you know is the distance. You will need to make adjustments  and correction with every following shot to hit the target. Now apply the same thing to a warship however now you need take into the account that you are moving while your target is moving. Add in the fact you need to include nature i.e. wind and wave (The sea can rock even battleships). Now you can shoot... oh wait you have to all of this while being attacked by American planes.

Well the Vanguard was cheaper because the Royal Navy at the time had several 15 inch gun and gun turrets in storage for them to go decide "Alright, let's get at least one battleship done even if it is not quite what we wanted". And even then, she underwent so several modifications that she was commissioned after the war.

However I will admit I was wrong about the H-class, I didn't see that part.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

TK9871 In reply to amirrrrruuuddddddiin [2017-01-15 11:15:22 +0000 UTC]

I like how you two are literally debating right now. 🤣

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

Chaos-Craft999 In reply to TK9871 [2017-01-17 16:08:23 +0000 UTC]

It always happen

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

amirrrrruuuddddddiin In reply to TK9871 [2017-01-15 12:33:48 +0000 UTC]

Well it is the internet, it is bound to happen.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0