|
Aramoro posted:I had seen somewhere they were hoping to have both the Russian and UK trees n before the end of the beta. Given that the largest Soviet Navy battleship they could realistically put in the game would be either a 1915 lend-lease British Royal Sovereign-class or a war-spoils-claimed Italian battleship, they'll really have to go to the napkins on that one. This would be a good candidate for a T9/T10: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kronshtadt-class_battlecruiser Cruisers, on the other hand...the Sverdlovs were used into the 80s.
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 12:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 04:47 |
|
|
They'll just napkin some kind of super Sovetsky Soyuz for the T10 Battleship.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 12:56
|
|
|
Atal Vataman posted:tbh the blucher went through that sound under the impression that the coastal fortress would only fire warning shots, which also was the case. however, the dude in charge had his own interpretation of protocol, which lead to the blucher getting boned by lucky hits from 28cm shells at point blank distance + a bunch of 15cms. Germans make severe tactical error, news at 11
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 12:58
|
|
|
this winter mode is hilarious, you can deny pubs any silver and xp by just rushing the cap with 5 man plat of arctic foxes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 12:59
|
|
|
Infected posted:They'll just napkin some kind of super Sovetsky Soyuz for the T10 Battleship. It'll probably a Project 24. Actually, this site's probably got a few of the high tier ships in the Soviet WoWS tree; http://russia-history.narod.ru/sovships.htm. Comedy/Russian Bias option: Kirov at tier 10. LostCosmonaut fucked around with this message at 13:11 on Jan 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 13:07
|
|
|
For those who missed out on the weekend and aren't in alpha, Jingles got special permission to upload some gameplay. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebx89jbm2vw
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 14:25
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:Really? It seems loving insane to add Russia to botes before the UK, and Germany + Italy should probably be in before Russia too. russianbias.jpg They've said they're adding USSR and UK in parallel but the UK got delayed so it'll be a bit later. Not a huge deal to me, pandering to primary markets is the sore of thing Americans demand all the time. Plus some of the USSR stuff looks fun. Some fast destroyers. Ichase also made a vid, probably better because he at least knows some mechanics even if he isn't great at it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 14:43
|
|
|
If not for Russian pandering, they should be adding UK and Germany together first, then France and Italy. Botes also seems to be a lot more flexible in the way they can approach their thinner trees, they're not enforcing development progression where none exists - the US Aircraft Carrier branch in particular is all out of order going 1920, 1942, 1944, 1931, 1927, 1942, x, and if memory serves US Destroyer progression got wonky in one or two place as well, stepping back in years to ensure they stepped up in size. NTRabbit fucked around with this message at 15:05 on Jan 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 15:01
|
|
|
KurdtLives posted:I thought he was one of the least warcrimey German generals. And he didn't rat out the conspiracy to assassinate dur fuhrer. Or is this just to troll wehraboos? That would be okay. Mostly to gently caress with closet Nazi's but also to put a nail into the coffin of the idea of "good" Nazi's. If they didn't try to save as many Jews as possible at personal risk or try and kill Hitler then gently caress them, a white wash for political expediency to rebuild Germany doesn't make them OK.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 15:02
|
|
|
Guys, I have nothing against boats, but could you like maybe make a thread? Otherwise I swear to god, I'm going to install WoWP and just constantly post about it in the tank thread, even if it's garbage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 15:11
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:If not for Russian pandering, they should be adding UK and Germany together first, then France and Italy. Germany should be after France and/or Italy if they aren't pandering at all. They at least had modern, good ship designs for WWII. And sorry French, this should honestly be in the passwords thread, it's really the least bad solution.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 15:22
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Germany should be after France and/or Italy if they aren't pandering at all. They at least had modern, good ship designs for WWII. I was going for adversarial match ups, I suppose it's just as valid to say England and Italy, then France and Germany
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 15:27
|
|
|
I'M GOING TO DRIVE TANKS TODAY IS EVERYONE ELSE? Still stuck on the stupid medium fire starter and heavy cap missions
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 15:28
|
|
|
WitchFetish posted:Guys, I have nothing against boats, but could you like maybe make a thread? Otherwise I swear to god, I'm going to install WoWP and just constantly post about it in the tank thread, even if it's garbage. There's a button at the top of the forums you click. It says "clicking here will make all your dreams come true!" on some versions, and others it says "Log Out". 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 15:45
|
|
|
One thing about carriers is the meta game, if you bring only one carrier it is a bit poo poo to bring one with 3 fighters and 1 bomber, after we each killed all our bombers we are pretty useless. On the other hand if you go with 2torps/2bombers you can get hosed up by someone bringing 3 fighters. This leads me to the conclusion you want to bring 3 carriers to achieve air dominance and then bring the pain to those slow BBs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
notwithoutmyanus posted:There's a button at the top of the forums you click. It says "clicking here will make all your dreams come true!" on some versions, and others it says "Log Out". Wow I'm sorry for suggesting you guys talk about tanks in the tanks thread.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
What is with hating so much on Germany's WWII fleet? One must first consider that Germany's fleet had mostly been scuttled at the end of WWI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scuttling_of_the_German_fleet_in_Scapa_Flow With that in mind, it takes a long time to rebuild an entire fleet from scratch. Germany partially succeeded at this. The ships they built were, at the start of the war, some of the most advanced obsolete warships in the world. Sadly for mustachio fuhrer, Battleships had been made obsolete sometime between WW1 and WWII thanks to the development of airplanes. Germany had a grand total of 0 aircraft carriers which meant that their ships could never roam the Atlantic without fears of getting sunk by something that cost 1/1000th of their price tag. All in all tho, if air power was taken out of the picture, Germany's navy could have inflicted a lot of damage to the Royal Navy. In all fairness, Bismark and Tirpitz were the most powerful warships of their time. Of course, throughout the war, better ships were being built. The Iowa-class Battleship is a good example. But one must not forget that Bismark-class BB's were designed in 1932 while the Iowa was designed in 1938. 6 years is a long time in war.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 16:47
|
|
|
So all this boats talk sounds fun, is their still way to into the Beta or am I SOL till release.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
Dalael posted:What is with hating so much on Germany's WWII fleet? The German WWII designs sucked. The Bismarck was 5000 tons heavier than the Richelieu and got a few debatable advantages and disadvantages. With a weak stern prone to collapse, bad underwater protection and unprotected key systems she was very prone to hits damaging her capabilities, something a commerce raider simply cannot afford, and all of those weaknesses contributed to her getting turned into a smoldering pile of scrap unable to resist by a bloody 1920 design. Their cruisers sucked harder. Look at how much more weight the Eugens needed than the British county class cruisers of 1928 to achieve mostly the same thing. Or their American, Japanese (overloaded but they did much more), Italian or French contemporaries. In fact, the Zara and Algerie are very good designs, and the French Algerie is regarded as one of the best treaty cruisers (the Zaras were a radar set away from fantastic). Half again the weight for not much capability if any, and a bunch more crew. The German destroyers were big fat pigs, compare the 1936-As to the French Mogadors. Weep softly. Move on. German aircraft carriers were actually just one lumber warehouse with a planned air wing that made British ideas look good. Sorry, but with access to Japanese practice, using biplane torpedo bombers for your scouts is pathetic. And 109s as carrier fighters is a very dubious idea. And guess what? She was way overweight. Half again the weight of the Yorktowns and an air wing of under 50 planes. If you like the small air wing of British carriers and the enclosed hangar with no armored flight deck of the Japanese tinderboxes, this is the lumber warehouse for you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
Gervasius posted:After today we can argue that Just Read the Intructions and Of Course I Still Love You are historical ship names. I saw that today and its made me fall in love with Musk http://www.dailydot.com/geek/elon-musk-drone-iain-m-banks/
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
Dalael posted:In all fairness, Bismark and Tirpitz were the most powerful warships of their time. Not when Nagatos, Richelieu, KGV and Nelsons exists. Also, North Carolina is only a few months younger than Bismarck and is so advanced compared to it that it's not even funny. German surface fleet was a bad joke.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
Dalael posted:
All in all, if air power was removed, Japan would have done a number on the US navy's WW1 era battlewagons before the Iowas and Montana's came into play. I can imagine the pants-making GBS threads terror of the captain of a WW1 era battleship as the Yamato or Musashi slowly came into view over the horizon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
I am so far behind on this thread I'll never catch up. Can someone summarize all the important bits from the last 25-30 pages? Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
NotWearingPants posted:I am so far behind on this thread I'll never catch up. (end summary)
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
Gervasius posted:Not when Nagatos, Richelieu, KGV and Nelsons exists. Also, North Carolina is only a few months younger than Bismarck and is so advanced compared to it that it's not even funny. The Bismark could have been a good ship in a a good fleet, It was fairly comparable to the KGV, a bit faster but weaker armour than the KGV. Broadside wise you've got 8 15" guns on the Bismark to 10 14" guns on the Bismark both of them out gunned by the older Nelson class with 9 16" guns. It's ultimately irrelevant though because the Bismark wasn't in a good fleet and there was no way it was going to escape from the KGV, Rodney, Edinburgh, Dorchester, Renown, Sheffield, Norfolk and Ark Royal. As soon as the Hood was sunk the Bismark was always going to follow soon after.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
If it wasn't for the rudder, wouldn't Bismarck have been able to make it to Brest?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:24
|
|
|
Why isn't anyone talking about Winter Showdown? I'm about to finish the 25 games mission for the second time and my mammoth crew will have brothers in arms before that. I don't understand why there is a cap circle in this game mode though, since capping achieves nothing except for griefing both teams.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
Saint Celestine posted:If it wasn't for the rudder, wouldn't Bismarck have been able to make it to Brest? Potentially, hard to say really the Ark royal, Renown and Sheffield were all coming from Gibraltar to intercept. Even if it had got to Brest it would have been stuck there. The British didn't have Revenge Class ships because they let things slide.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
Doffen posted:I don't understand why there is a cap circle in this game mode though, since capping achieves nothing except for griefing both teams.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
NotWearingPants posted:I am so far behind on this thread I'll never catch up. Its now a World of Warships thread. If you dare ask why the game doesn't have its own thread, you are somehow a human being and you need to log out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
Aramoro posted:Even if it had got to Brest it would have been stuck there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_Dash 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:The German WWII designs sucked. The Bismarck was 5000 tons heavier than the Richelieu and got a few debatable advantages and disadvantages. With a weak stern prone to collapse, bad underwater protection and unprotected key systems she was very prone to hits damaging her capabilities, something a commerce raider simply cannot afford, and all of those weaknesses contributed to her getting turned into a smoldering pile of scrap unable to resist by a bloody 1920 design. Considering it sunk a battlecruiser in under 8 minutes, damaged another one badly enough that it had to withdraw, took a few torpedoes and still managed to sail away... only to be scuttled by its crew after a 10 hour battle in which it was badly outnumbered and reduced to shambles... I think Bismark did okay. xthetenth posted:Their cruisers sucked harder. Look at how much more weight the Eugens needed than the British county class cruisers of 1928 to achieve mostly the same thing. Or their American, Japanese (overloaded but they did much more), Italian or French contemporaries. In fact, the Zara and Algerie are very good designs, and the French Algerie is regarded as one of the best treaty cruisers (the Zaras were a radar set away from fantastic). Half again the weight for not much capability if any, and a bunch more crew. poo poo, I wasn't even aware that the germans had a concept for a carrier, no matter how lovely it was.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
Dalael posted:poo poo, I wasn't even aware that the germans had a concept for a carrier, no matter how lovely it was. The concept for a carrier is really quite simple though, at least in the late 30s. It was just a flight deck on any ol' hull you could get your hands on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
Doffen posted:Why isn't anyone talking about Winter Showdown? I'm about to finish the 25 games mission for the second time and my mammoth crew will have brothers in arms before that. I played one game and I thought it was stupid and not fun. But I guess I'll end up doing it for another American heavy crew.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
Am I correct that the only way to change settings or configure McGavin's modpack is by editing the .xc files? I find it takes up way too much screen. I am using this as an excuse for being terrible at the game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
Only two things I have to say about botes before returning to our regularly tankled programming is that I had a lot of fun playing them and I hope they group the WWI era and 1930s - WWII era ships apart. It was weird seeing a casemate St. Louis getting pummeled by WWII era planes. I think it would be fun to have no aircraft Battle of Jutland type games.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
Any advice for dealing with games with lots of artillery other than "uninstall this stupid piece of poo poo game?" Getting nailed by arty for 75% of my HP behind a three story house because arty cover is a myth in this game is less than fun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
Dalael posted:Considering it sunk a battlecruiser in under 8 minutes, damaged another one badly enough that it had to withdraw, took a few torpedoes and still managed to sail away... only to be scuttled by its crew after a 10 hour battle in which it was badly outnumbered and reduced to shambles... I think Bismark did okay. I got an ammorack kill while suicide rushing into the enemy team. I am a good player, stats are just luck!  E: For some tanks content, apparently in 9.6 you have to accept friend requests before they are active, so no more shitters messaging you after battles to insult you/no more messaging shitters after battle to insult them. Darkrenown fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Jan 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
The combination of arty missions and this daft sniper scope mod Battle Assistant has just had Grilles doing 700 damage constantly to my Tiger and one shotting my T-34-85 on the move. Its getting grim - too grim.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 04:47 |
|
|
Dalael posted:Considering it sunk a battlecruiser in under 8 minutes, damaged another one badly enough that it had to withdraw, took a few torpedoes and still managed to sail away... only to be scuttled by its crew after a 10 hour battle in which it was badly outnumbered and reduced to shambles... I think Bismark did okay. Sinking a British battlecruiser is not a particularly difficult feat. In fact, German battlecruisers did it three times at Jutland and they didn't have the advantages of over a decade. The KGV hadn't worked up yet and was missing salvoes constantly, and yet it still got a hit into the vitals of the Bismarck and retreated in pretty good shape, leaving her opponent with a restricted range the would have been fatal on its own in a lot of cases. I guess destroying a 15 year old ship that was dangerously obsolescent when new and managing to come out slightly ahead of a ship that can only fire about half as many shells as you is okay for a supposedly good ship? Maybe? Regarding torpedo hits, battleships are supposed to be able to take them. It's kind of a problem when a single torpedo causes the stern to irreparably collapse onto the rudders and lock them in place, especially on a ship that has differential thrust steering capability that's pathetic by the standards of other navies. The only battleship to fare worse under torpedo attack was the PoW, and the Bismarck had nothing to prevent a screw hit like that from gutting her as well. A single torpedo shouldn't render a ship unnavigable without a hit to the screws. The triple screw stern made for a weakness where one didn't need to be. Finally, the point of a battleship is to remain capable of combat as long as possible. The Bismarck sacrificed combat capability to stay afloat. This led to one of the saddest excuses for a battle in history, where a vaunted supership sat there helpless after losing two turrets in twenty minutes and all guns in under an hour to a ship 15 years her elder and a ship whose guns only kinda worked while only able to score a single miss of 20 feet. And yeah, carriers aren't that hard. Decent carriers are hard and very good carriers are quite difficult, but the Graf Lumberyard was neither.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 19:32
|
|