world of warships oktyabrskaya revolutsiya vs giulio cesare

The problem of the 320's were that they were rebored WWI guns. So having poor accuracy would not be justified, at least in Littorio's (or Roma's) case. At least in Littorio's case, her guns were the most accurate designed by the Regia Marina, but the shells doomed their performance. There were shell weight variations well outside of the tolerance specified by the designers. More like the manufacturing standards of the italian navy were not up to international standards. The only cases where it's really clear what's causing the dispersion is when it's the guns sharing the common cradles, because they're mounted to close (8' guns, 6'/53, 120mm dual mounts) That's barely scratching the surface of the discussion though. The dispersion question is honestly a massively messy discussion, as it's not clear how much is just anecdotal evidence, mistaken fall of shot, etc, and how much is technical - for example, while variations in shell weight have been cited, I've read that the changes in shell weight of the degree indicated wouldn't have the effect claimed. iirc, Littorio herself holds the record for the longest-range opening salvo ever fired using optics. Personally, I don't see a justification either, but Sparviero's point is that there was a bad habit of opening up at extreme ranges of gunnery in the RM.

But I don't see the justification for giving Italian ships best-in-class dispersion. Not 'poor accuracy when used at extreme range against a difficult target,' which would be as much as saying nothing about accuracy at all. What I've read just says flatly that accuracy/dispersion suffered, presumably relative to comparable weapons.

World of warships oktyabrskaya revolutsiya vs giulio cesare