I thought their deck pen was at ranges of 22km+ Lord knows FDG doesn't need any buffs yet.Īnd its not like North Carolina has much broadside survivability to begin with. If it starts to outperform because of it, you change other aspects of the ship, or perhaps buff Izumo. You give this bugfix to Iowa, and you're just switching from Iowa broadside survivability to North Carolina broadside survivability.

Meanwhile Colorado still wallows at the bottom of the list, seemingly forgotten to time. In particular, the sheer speed at which the Nagato bugfix was implemented struck me as hilarious, because it buffed an already great ship without consequences.

Neither of those ships were considered to exactly be struggling in their respective tiers, and both have profited greatly as a result of them. Arizona got a rather large buff from a bugfix, and nobody gave it a second thought because it was a premium. What part of 'if its a bug, it should be fixed' is that controversial? Nagato got a massive buff through a bugfix (THAT I DISCOVERED AND PUSHED FOR, so don't try to pin 'USN fanboy' on me), and nobody spoke out about the consequences of making 2/3rds of the ship invulnerable to citpens much like the German battleships.

We should also fix Iowa's frontal bulkhead. Because Iowa is of course underperforming and is 'the only good USN BB.'Īt this point, I say go for it. So let's just give a flat out buff to Iowa with no other changes to any other Tier IX BB.

World of warships iowa citidel