R. Lauria will become available in the Armory in Update 12.11

[Helstrem]

48 minutes ago, BOBTHEBALL said:

No Shikishima is a sidegrade to Yamato.

As stated, Shikishima is an upgrade.  Its guns are just as good and its AA is better.  At the very least it is a small upgrade.

Personally I find Shikishima's main guns better too.

[__Helmut_Kohl__]

2 hours ago, Helstrem said:

As stated, Shikishima is an upgrade.  Its guns are just as good and its AA is better.  At the very least it is a small upgrade.

Personally I find Shikishima's main guns better too.

 

Not only does Yamato have 50% more guns, with Legendary Upgrade it is even more accurate than Shikishima (overall dispersion area; counting in horizontal and vertical dispersion):

 

 

You can check it yourself at https://jcw780.github.io/wows_ballistics/

Edited December 7, 2023 by __Helmut_Kohl__

[BOBTHEBALL]

3 hours ago, Helstrem said:

As stated, Shikishima is an upgrade.  Its guns are just as good and its AA is better.  At the very least it is a small upgrade.

Personally I find Shikishima's main guns better too.

You're most definitely wrong but that's ok you can choose to learn more about the ships when you feel like it.

[BOBTHEBALL]

30 minutes ago, __Helmut_Kohl__ said:

 

Not only does Yamato have 50% more guns, with Legendary Upgrade it is even more accurate than Shikishima (overall dispersion area; counting in horizontal and vertical dispersion):

 

 

You can check it yourself at https://jcw780.github.io/wows_ballistics/

You've hit the nail on the head, also lets not mention paying 30k steel for a sidegrade of a TT ship.

[YouSatInGum]

Lauria plays more like other battle cruisers in the game.  Stealthy, fast, low hp, suspect armor.

 

The overmatch SAP is truly unfair to cruisers.  Peak no counterplay.

In my book this ship is more toxic than Smolensk.

So I bought it.

 

WG obviously has zero problem with more bad design in the game...

[Nevermore135]

9 hours ago, Helstrem said:

As stated, Shikishima is an upgrade.  Its guns are just as good and its AA is better.  At the very least it is a small upgrade.

Personally I find Shikishima's main guns better too.

Yamato has 50% more guns, which makes her salvos more consistent, and has ~14.5% more AP alpha per salvo. Shikishima’s main advantage is that she can run MBM3 to drop her reload to 23.8s vs. UU Yamato’s 30s, which also means she has ~8.75% higher AP DPM with effectively the same overmatch (35mm overmatch is fairly niche).

Yamato is better at dev-striking opponents from across the map, while Shikishima’s faster reload means you can cycle your guns with less risk of missing an opportunistic shot and her higher DPM can make a difference in prolonged engagements.

 

Edited December 8, 2023 by Nevermore135

[__Helmut_Kohl__]

3 hours ago, Nevermore135 said:

Yamato is better at dev-striking opponents from across the map, while Shikishima’s faster reload means you can cycle your guns with less risk of missing an opportunistic shot and her higher DPM can make a difference in prolonged engagements.

Yamato has a higher base-DPM and can equip reload mod as well. So if you are after DPM, just skip the last -7% dispersion that the Leg Mod provides.

[Nevermore135]

4 hours ago, __Helmut_Kohl__ said:

Yamato has a higher base-DPM and can equip reload mod as well. So if you are after DPM, just skip the last -7% dispersion that the Leg Mod provides.

Yes, but if one does so then the comparison becomes more nuanced. Via the standard you described above (total dispersion area) Shikashima becomes the more accurate ship, while maintaining the advantage (albeit reduced) of having a faster reload. Of course, Shikishima maintains her advantages in AA/secondaries, rudder shift time, and shell flight time at longer ranges, however much value one attaches to those, regardless.

Shikishima’s base horizontal dispersion model is ever so slightly superior to that of UU Yamato, which as this is the dispersion that is shown in port is likely the source of the claim that the two have identical dispersion. The values are so close that one can effectively simplify the choice between UU Yamato and MBM3 Shikishima (the most common and typically accepted to be the optimized builds for each) to Shikishima trading ~10-12% more vertical dispersion (the source of the higher calculated dispersion ellipse area and due to lower shell drag despite having less intitial shell velocity) and salvo weight for the ~9% higher DPM/~6s faster reload I cited above. One also should consider that vertical dispersion is somewhat mitigated when one has LOL-pen AP (32mm overmatch) since if you are putting a lot of shells through the bows and sterns of angled ships (especially high-tier battleships), your shells falling a bit short or long becomes less of an issue than if you were throwing around smaller shells.

Edited December 8, 2023 by Nevermore135

[__Helmut_Kohl__]

53 minutes ago, Nevermore135 said:

Yes, but if one does so then the comparison becomes more nuanced. Via the standard you described above (total dispersion area) Shikashima becomes the more accurate ship, while maintaining the advantage (albeit reduced) of having a faster reload. Of course, Shikishima maintains her advantages in AA/secondaries, rudder shift time, and shell flight time at longer ranges, however much value one attaches to those, regardless.

Shikishima’s base horizontal dispersion model is ever so slightly superior to that of UU Yamato, which as this is the dispersion that is shown in port is likely the source of the claim that the two have identical dispersion. The values are so close that one can effectively simplify the choice between UU Yamato and MBM3 Shikishima (the most common and typically accepted to be the optimized builds for each) to Shikishima trading ~10-12% more vertical dispersion (the source of the higher calculated dispersion ellipse area and due to lower shell drag despite having less intitial shell velocity) and salvo weight for the ~9% higher DPM/~6s faster reload I cited above. One also should consider that vertical dispersion is somewhat mitigated when one has LOL-pen AP (32mm overmatch) since if you are putting a lot of shells through the bows and sterns of angled ships (especially high-tier battleships), your shells falling a bit short or long becomes less of an issue than if you were throwing around smaller shells.

 

There is a difference in horizontal dispersion (Yamato uses X*7.2+84; Shikishima uses X*6.2+84), but it is not significant at normal engagement ranges.

 

The vertical dispersion is verly similar. Just look how their vertical dispersion compares to Incomparable, which uses the actual BC dispersion formula:

Edited December 8, 2023 by __Helmut_Kohl__

[__Helmut_Kohl__]

.

Edited December 8, 2023 by __Helmut_Kohl__

[Nevermore135]

7 hours ago, __Helmut_Kohl__ said:

The vertical dispersion is verly similar. Just look how their vertical dispersion compares to Incomparable, which uses the actual BC dispersion formula:

I’m away from my PC at the moment, but IIRC when I last checked the numbers the difference in vertical dispersion between UU Yamato and Shikishima was in the range I quoted above at maximum range (26.6km).
 

The difference in base horizontal dispersion between the two ships is also notable, as it’s on the same order of magnitude as ASM1/the Yamato UU’s 7% bonus (Yamato with one of the 7% bonuses is still slightly worse than Shikishima).

Edited December 8, 2023 by Nevermore135

[Helstrem]

I run UU on Yamato and MB3 on Musashi and Shikishima.  My original plan was to run a secondary build on Shikishima, but WG put paid to that with the captain skill rework.