i get that but the fact that even when you look into the history of said zao via the WG wiki it is stated that said zao was based on and i quote from said page " I don't think I would take DM over Zao either. On 24/08/2017 at 8:07 PM, Predator_Strike said:
From there, the US believed Japan was building a 6x 30cm ship 'Chichibu class' (which turned out to be untrue) so they built the Alaskas. You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
It's captain is a 14 level so I have some ceiling left to grow.
She was designed in response to the USN's Alaskas which stems from the arms race in Europe where the Deutschlands prompted France to build the Dunkerques, which in turn Germany built the Scharnhorsts.
My Zao has a 16 point captain I think, I think AR is a must, maybe RDF would bring more utility so you could stay undetected when needed..?
That doesnt meant i cant be caught slipping.
If someone asks an archetypal IJN cruiser, three distinct cruisers should typically come out to one's mind: the Myoko, the Takao, and the Mogami.
Basically, the navy went to the design boards and just outright said:"Right then ya silly designers, give as a supercruiser that can flex to any situations ranging from flotilla leader to basic heavy cruiser duties because in the decisive battle, it shall be our lynchpin. Yes i know it is not the zao that is what the zao is based off of from world of warships point of view as even in historical standpoint the zao was never a ship I recently picked up a Zao and am very happy with it once I set it up to my style of play. They had a maximum speed of 35.5 knots. It is well known by this point that Zaō is the Type A heavy cruiser 1941.
Now before i say anything i will state that yes the zao is a very good ship but after the removal of the ability for destroyers and cruisers to be able to stealth fire with ease in japan line. Dunno what magazine this was peeled but according to some bits long ago, this thing was named "Unzen" by the magazine that pub'd it.In a more interesting sense, the Japanese were hardcore cruiser nuts because it was actually found out that the mighty battleship doesn't make the difference in APAC, it was the humble cruiser, with all her stalwart reliability, that made some of the more insane skirmishes in the Pacific theater. As the zao is based on the 1941 Type A Heavy Cruiser which is also known to be the Design B-65 cruiser that japan had planned back in 1939 and was to be made in 1942.
This heavy cruiser was designed in 1941 and called for an unusual turret layout, equipped with twelve 203mm guns and a better propulsion system for higher speeds. Now while most ships have dinghy's and rowboats, cramming the cruiser chuck full of boats is strange where it could be laced with AA gun nests. "Since the whole design iterations are gone, there were some concepts made, one of which was this which the RUdevs went and ran with and adding said shipbucketer's own iteration:THIS was said to be "fake" yet used the same requirements of the 1941 Type A cruiser. The ship in easiest terms was a "baby Yamato" so at least from my point of view of historical accuracy i would love to see them redesign the zao to make it more to its correct design with altered stats to not make it a dumbly "OP" ship compared to the other T10 Ships. But that is where the zao kinda falls off from the historically correct part of it. Maru 6 Rearmament plan Type A cruiser was the zao so give me a form of proof that this class of ship existed with a ship named zao under its tree Maru 6 Rearmament plan Type A cruiser was the zao so give me a form of proof that this class of ship existed with a ship named zao under its tree Maru 6 Rearmament plan Type A cruiser was the zao so give me a form of proof that this class of ship existed with a ship named zao under its tree The ship in easiest terms was a "baby Yamato" so at least from my point of view of historical accuracy i would love to see them redesign the zao to make it more to its correct design with altered stats to not make it a dumbly "OP" ship compared to the other T10 Ships.
[NDA] You do know the original name for the Zao was Senjo right? and they simple changed the name to a bigger mountain. Dahell WG Japan.
For starters, the concept has a LOT OF lolboats. I take Zao over Hindenburg (in fact I did), but i do play my Moskva and Mino way more. The B-65 which you mention, and as Katajainen has stated, is a completely different design, better suited for a lower tier BB...I think. Japanese heavy cruisers began with the Myoko-class, a class of four warships designed and constructed in the 1920's.
There has been speculation that the Alaska class would eventually appear in-game - so tho the Zao is a hypothetical design that fits the IJN Cruiser line more "comfortably", you may get your wish in a alternative form when the Alaska Class BCs are added to the game at some point in the future. More power to ya! Now, this playstyle is not the most constructive to winning, and it's winrate suffers because of that. W/O torps i would give no respect to Hinde. [NDA] No where has anyone claimed it was a different design until now. Sure the design iterations were torched because lolsekrits (hell, it took the US guys combined with the Japanese information raiders to actually find stuff about the Yamato due to said torching because lolsekrits) but what the navy asked still kinda exists and it was part of the Circle Six Naval Rearming Program and it was the 1941 Type A cruiser. Still, I play those two boats 10 to 1 over my others. It must be able to take punishment from 8 inch guns, the deck being capable of eating 500 lb bombs, can run at 35 kt max, and has twelve 203's to boot. All three/all T10 Cruisers are great. We fear no DD at any range and can usually sink em before they can throw fish. I mean sure Zao is a freakin mountain because heavy cruisers were named for mountains and light cruisers for rivers (Mogami is an exception because they attempted to cheat) but ain't Senjo a freakin' mountain as well?!