For what it is worth, removal of conning tower is by no means unprecedented. In fact, I would expect that to occur to remediate topweight problems associated with SPY-1's addition.
But it's a drawing for fun, not a naval architecture senior design project. If you want it, keep it. I think it can be justified (at least acting without the benefit of hindsight) if you're willing to bend over sufficiently far backwards.
Personally I think there's enough justification to keep it. Plus, topweight problems are sort of accounted for by the bulge, and there are certainly stupider parts of this design that I'm still keeping (replaced engines, rebuilt bow).
But you're absolutely right, this isn't a naval architecture senior design project. If it were, I know for a fact I wouldn't have put an armored conning tower there in the first place. Hell, probably a good half of the choices in this drawing are things that I wouldn't do if this were such a project.
no shame about the SeaRAM, because I learned something new from that post as well
It was quite the informative post. Honestly this whole thing has taught me a lot more than I ever thought it would.