Wait a second. We're slow and short ranged and with worse shell dispersion than the Japanese BB's? Slow I can sort of understand. Short-ranged and with poor accuracy? We had some of the best fire direction in the entire war, if not the best.
Like I said, they've tried to justify it by the placement of the main battery directors; though it's very obvious that this A: ignores radar direction and B: ignores the actual placement of USN main battery directors in Sky Control on many ships, which is well over 135 feet over the waterline, making them every bit as long-ranged as
Fuso by that logic and C: ignores reality, as there are multiple recorded cases of ships with low director placement engaging accurately at 20000 yards or more (c.f.
Prince of Wales vs.
Bismarck,
Scharnhorst vs.
Glorious).
We did have some fun with someone trying to assert
New York's main battery director was on her second turret at the time of Pearl Harbor, though, rather than in Sky Control.
The dispersion, though? No justification at all so far. No reason why we're inaccurate.
Also ArdRaiess at one point tried to rebut a comment on non-Allied radars by linking to a page on Russian radar, so apparently Wargaming doesn't believe the Russians were part of the Allied powers.
