I think the idea here is to have a "finisher" ship that can punish bad positioning of light cruisers, and she's very good at that. Make a mistake in a Jinan at 15km from this thing, and you could be one-shot. That's where all the BHs point to. The problem is, she isn't good at anything else, and given the size of this thing, can't operate within base range. They've kind of painted themselves into a corner with the scout II, I'd say give her range comparable to the top tier Soviet supercruisers - something close to 14km - and take the scout down to I in return, and then either give her working secondaries for an ambush capability, or actual working AA for a support cruiser / base camper, and then we're talking. She still wouldn't be too powerful, since she doesn't have anywhere near Soviet dispersion, but at least she can do _something_ when she's not ambushing CLs that isn't suicidal.

So many ships have large secondaries that don't do anything 😞

@@NCR-National-Reclamation-Gov all except Napoli and Anchorage-

Same, when I've seen the screenshots, I thought this would be a three-system supercruiser of sorts. That said, with the armour on those things, having secondaries isn't going to help much, since you'd be blown out of the water cleanly before you ever got to use them in most situations. Still, would have been nice.

T10 isn't quite as bad as T9, but still, probably a free ship slot I'd say ;)

@@FunandGameswithTerry I mean yeah, though it probably won’t be played for a couple months

Very true - the purpose of this line is to punish enemy cruisers, or finish off low-HP ships that are trying to get away, and they've very good at that. Unfortunately, in T9-10, not very good at anything else... ;)

If only the secondaries, that are so prominent on the 3D model, would work...

@@FunandGameswithTerry yea u said it😅

I have Napoli and play enhanced camo where if you move on the flank you can torpedo without detection especially if there is no CV. Can this one do that?

You sometimes think that there's reason behind stats, like the Veneto having good torpedo defence (Pugliese, although it didn't actually work that well), but then I look at British battleships...

Oooh, I'll bite :) No, actually, they didn't. I just generally try to be as objective as possible, but especially when I'm fresh from a 10-round testing session, frustration can get the better of me, and I can get a little snarky, so I'm just trying to keep the balance :) In more general terms, WG doesn't dictate what we can or can't say about ships. Of course, if I were to go on a swearing, ad-hominem tirade, it wouldn't be well received, but valid criticism, even when laced with sarcasm, is always fair game. And I do value my integrity :) Opinions are all mine

@@FunandGameswithTerry I respect that.

Yeah, not a fan. Given that this is a tech tree line, we might see improvements down the road, though, in upcoming versions, so I wouldn't give up on it as a line, and T7 (and, to a degree, 8) are still very much worth it