Speaking of the A140-J2, it was a strangely lul concept but was C turret really facing aft? I mean that would have been strange since the ABC layout should have presented the ship a narrower target or somefin though doubt C turret could even fire since I did hear that the Nelsons couldn't pop a gun there unless the superstructure is sort of empty.

The way it's presented here, it's pretty useless, too. Presuming its elevation/depression is the same as a normal turret, that thing could only shoot at her feet or directly into the hull if firing forward.

i don't understand why people have such a bad opinion of this girl

every time I shoot at this bote it takes basically 0 damage, it's practically invincible when angled

ezekill said:

Speaking of the A140-J2, it was a strangely lul concept but was C turret really facing aft? I mean that would have been strange since the ABC layout should have presented the ship a narrower target or somefin though doubt C turret could even fire since I did hear that the Nelsons couldn't pop a gun there unless the superstructure is sort of empty.

The aft-facing C turret is designed to save on barbette and magazine armor. With the "current" config (aftward-superfiring-forward) all three barbette are bunched close together. Less volume to protect.
If C-turret is facing forward, then there needs to be gap at least one barrel length between B and C turret.

At least that's the most plausible design decision I can think of. WWII battleships were fighting broadside anyway, so turret arc rarely matters.

MQN said:

i don't understand why people have such a bad opinion of this girl

every time I shoot at this bote it takes basically 0 damage, it's practically invincible when angled

Like an IJN Version of the Free French Navy Dunkurque with an extra turret!
But if you want Jap T10 BB Shipfu Yamato, I'll just say this, The grind is vicious... Like KM T8,9,10 BBs, USS Colorado and

MQN said:

i don't understand why people have such a bad opinion of this girl

every time I shoot at this bote it takes basically 0 damage, it's practically invincible when angled

She was bugged back in beta and IIRC early release, there was a gap in the side armor model so she ate tons of citadels if anything even sneezed at her broadside, even when super angled if a shell went into the gap she'd eat cits due to this. This was fixed a long time ago now, but the damage to her reputation was slower to fade. Still, nowadays not many people consider her bad, many would argue she's rather better all around then Iowa. She just kind of pales compared to Yamato so she's one of those ships that's pretty much a "gotta get through it to get to the REAL good stuff" sort of deal.

ezekill said:

Speaking of the A140-J2, it was a strangely lul concept but was C turret really facing aft? I mean that would have been strange since the ABC layout should have presented the ship a narrower target or somefin though doubt C turret could even fire since I did hear that the Nelsons couldn't pop a gun there unless the superstructure is sort of empty.

The issue that the Nelsons had was that firing the C turret (inexplicably designated as a "Y turret" by the Royal Navy) would shatter every window on the bridge when aiming at to the rear and firing at high elevations. This wasn't unique to the Nelsons, but the turret layout exacerbated the problem. The Royal Navy tried all sorts of ways to reinforce the windows on their battleships' bridges against the shockwave produced by the guns. The US Navy on the other hand simply rolled down the bridge windows before firing the main guns.

MQN said:

i don't understand why people have such a bad opinion of this girl

every time I shoot at this bote it takes basically 0 damage, it's practically invincible when angled

She's prone to fire.
So just spam HE shells on her.

lookingfrank said:

She's prone to fire.
So just spam HE shells on her.

Exactly! plus the XP grinding for the upgrades and for the Yamato and everyone thought the Colorado was terrible.