Comments by "Bk Jeong" (@bkjeong4302) on "IJN Myoko - Guide 371" video.

  1. Japanese cruisers from the Myokos onwards ended up being overarmed for their displacement, even with being 2000 tons above treaty limits. The biggest issue with them was they being so heavily armed to the point of having structural issues (which is part of why they ended up above treaty limits: they tried to fit everything WITHIN limits, found it didn’t work, and decided to just add another 2000 tons).
    34
  2.  @Paludion  While building the Yamatos was a terrible idea, building more heavy cruisers isn’t exactly going to give Japan what they need either. The best option would have been to build 2 more Shokakus instead of the Yamatos (more than that is going to be too much for Japan’s available infrastructure), but even that’s not enough to change the outcome of the war.
    8
  3.  @johnfisher9692  Japanese and German cruiser designs aren’t really comparable: the Japanese managed to fit about 15,000 ton’s worth of firepower, armour and speed onto 12,000 tons, while the Germans put 10,000 tons’ worth on 18,000 tons. The Japanese ships were legitimately efficient (if anything, TOO efficient), the German cruisers were hilariously inefficient.
    5
  4.  @johnfisher9692  You do realize that the reason people call German cruisers inefficient isn’t because they broke treaty limits, but because they had very limited capability for their size meaning their size was completely pointless from an effectiveness perspective? This doesn’t apply to the Japanese cruisers: they had their flaws, fairly major ones when it came to structural integrity, but they were anything but inefficient and wasteful in space as the German designs were. Again, you’re arguing that “it’s bigger than a treaty cruiser so it MUST be only as capable as an actual treaty-compliant cruiser”, when that only applies to the German designs and not the Italians or the Japanese. By that logic you could argue the Baltimores were inefficient designs simply because they were larger than treaty cruisers.
    5
  5.  @jonathanwhite5132  The Japanese came up with one but never bothered to build them.
    3
  6.  @B1lly_  Worse for the Japanese: Ise and Hyuuga aren’t fast enough for a Slot run.
    2
  7.  @AWMJoeyjoejoe  Mikuma and Suzuya off the top of my head, both due to bombing. Not Chokai; Lundgren’s analysis doubted that idea and her wreck confirmed his suspicions.
    2
  8.  @VersusARCH  She was the target not the attacker in this case.
    1
  9.  @silincer5186  Some of the later Japanese cruisers were faster.
    1
  10.  @silincer5186  Mogamis
    1
  11.  @Ah01  The Yamatos weren’t intended to act as a deterrence until the USN found out about their real specs the hard way (which they never did). Only then would the deterrence part kick in.
    1
  12.  @Ah01  2 more carriers would have been better than the 2 Yamatos (keeping in mind that Japan wouldn’t have enough infrastructure to build more than that even if they didn’t build the Yamatos), but bear in mind that a) that’s still not going to be enough against the Essex swarm, and b) the US never figured this out either until it was too late (hence them putting 10 fast battleships into service in WWII instead of another 10 Essexes).
    1
  13.  @Ah01  they would still have gotten far more use of another 10 Essexes than the 10 fast battleships (or even another 4 in place of the 4 Iowas that ended up being the world’s biggest and most expensive AA destroyers)
    1
  14. You can only really do that with aircraft carriers where your massive attack range acts as protection all in its own.
    1
  15. Eh, those did a fair amount as well early in the war.
    1