Jump to content


New Premium Ships Ideas

WOWS Premium Ships Poll

  • Please log in to reply
60 replies to this topic

Poll: Premium Ship Ideas (86 members have cast votes)

What Ship(s) should be added in the game as Premium(s)?

  1. USS Laffey (DD-724) (17 votes [6.18%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 6.18%

  2. USS Samuel B. Roberts (DE-413) (24 votes [8.73%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 8.73%

  3. USS Alaska (CB-1) (52 votes [18.91%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 18.91%

  4. USS California (BB-44) (23 votes [8.36%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 8.36%

  5. USS Nevada (BB-36) (25 votes [9.09%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 9.09%

  6. IJN Yahagi (CR) (15 votes [5.45%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 5.45%

  7. IJN Ise (BB) (21 votes [7.64%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 7.64%

  8. IJN Tosa (planned BB) (13 votes [4.73%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 4.73%

  9. Graff Zepplin (planned CV; if German carrier tree isn't added to game) (32 votes [11.64%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 11.64%

  10. SMS Derfflinger (CR) (16 votes [5.82%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 5.82%

  11. Kronshtadt-class (planned CR) (9 votes [3.27%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 3.27%

  12. Stalingrad-class (planned CR) (13 votes [4.73%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 4.73%

  13. Other (please respond in comments) (15 votes [5.45%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 5.45%

Vote Guests cannot vote Hide poll

XXRed_DawnXX #1 Posted 17 April 2017 - 04:56 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 61
  • Member since:
    04-09-2015

I'm glad that Wargaming is finally considering adding the British cruiser HMS Hood, the Japanese carrier IJN Kaga, and the American carrier USS Enterprise (CV-6) as premiums (they were featured in official posts about new premium additions that are soon to be added into the game), yet, there are more ships that should be added into the game. If not part of an extension to a tech-tree, at least a premium.

 

Assuming that Wargaming will add British BB/CV/DD tech trees, a Russian BB tech tree, French BB/DD tech trees, Italian BB/CR/DD tech trees, a German planned carrier tree, and a Japanese carrier tree extension that will all hopefully be added to the game soon. What ship(s) do you think they should add into the game. If it's not in the poll, feel free to respond in the comments.


Edited by XXRed_DawnXX, 16 May 2017 - 04:57 PM.

LINE OFFICER, EQUESTRIAN ROYAL NAVY

.-.. ..- -. .- / .. ... / -... . ... - / .--. .-. .. -. -.-. . ... ...

.--. .-. .- .. ... . / - .... . / -. .. --. .... -


Chaos_EN2 #2 Posted 17 April 2017 - 05:00 PM

    Chief Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 171
  • Member since:
    10-15-2016

 

 

 

 

USS Samuel B. Roberts (DE-413)

USS Olympia (C-6)

 

I would love to BOTH of these ships added to the game as Premium.


Proud Former USN Sailor - EN2 1978-1986 - USS El Paso LKA-117 - USS Whidbey Island LSD-41 (Plank Owner), Proud Member of Grey Wolf Gamers http://graywolfgamers.enjin.com/ Current Ships - Smith, Caledon, Friant, Okhotnik, Perth, Fiji

 


 


SergeantHop #3 Posted 17 April 2017 - 05:02 PM

    Captain

  • Members

  • 4,234
  • Member since:
    10-10-2012
What's a CR?

#1 in the world for max base XP in Tirpitz

 

Check out my premium camo thread here!


Unabletony #4 Posted 17 April 2017 - 05:06 PM

    Rear Admiral

  • Members

  • 7,517
  • Member since:
    10-31-2015

Russian BBs won't be added in a long time.

 

Also, some of them are planned as tech trees, such as Ise, California, and Nevada.

 

What's a CR?


Because Hyuuga is cute~

Azuki is my catpanion~

Take that, Nyagato-sempai~!

 


Pugilistic #5 Posted 17 April 2017 - 05:08 PM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 958
  • Member since:
    09-09-2015
My interest has waned because of nerfs to Premiums and the less enjoyable meta following 0.6.3. Up to Okhotnik, I had every Premium ship offered, but my wallet is closed.

The Shack was a famous watering hole in Chapel Hill NC across the street from He's Not Here. It was torn down, despite all predictions it would fall down first, about 1990. Preppy Heaven at Blue Heaven.

Battlecruiser_Yavuz #6 Posted 17 April 2017 - 05:24 PM

    Rear Admiral

  • Alpha Tester

  • 6,253
  • Member since:
    02-13-2013

View PostPugilistic, on 17 April 2017 - 09:08 AM, said:

My interest has waned because of nerfs to Premiums and the less enjoyable meta following 0.6.3. Up to Okhotnik, I had every Premium ship offered, but my wallet is closed.

 

How were premiums nerfed?  If anything, premiums have seemingly been buffed since they were dominating last year's ranked - a big problem for a lot of people.

 

Commissioned by Battleship_DukeofYork

Sailing the seas alongside the NAFGO


jmanII #7 Posted 17 April 2017 - 05:35 PM

    Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Beta Testers

  • 291
  • Member since:
    05-03-2013

I pretty much agree with the more premium, the better - for the "Other" category:

 

USS WICHITA (CA-45) - Take the Cleveland and put the New Orleans 8" guns on it.  Would probably be at least a little better than the Indianapolis (most anything would be).

 

LEXINGTON CLASS Battle Cruiser of 1919 - the carrier was converted from this hull.  Would be nice to have a US CB with 16" guns.

 

USS WORCHESTER (CL-144):  Although it would most likely be the tier X CL if the line ever splits - would still like it to be in game if the split does not happen.  6" auto guns that are not British, SWEET!  Judging by a recent TAP post, this is going to happen.  My next would have been BROOKLYN (CL-40) but this is most likely going to be included in the CL/CA split also.

 

HMS VANGUARD: Not likely to be in the British BB line as it is a single ship class, perhaps a bit undergunned with old 15" guns from Courageous and Glorius.  Possibly a tier VII?  Last battleship to be launched in the world.



Warden_Wolf #8 Posted 17 April 2017 - 05:47 PM

    Chief Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 176
  • Member since:
    08-27-2015

USS Alaska

 

The Alaskas were the closest things America ever built to a battlecruiser. They were constructed like cruisers, but strongly resembled smaller versions of Iowa-class battleships. They were armed with 12" guns of a new design that actually fired a heavier warhead at longer ranges than the old Wyoming-class battleships, at a rate of 2.4 to 3 per minute.

 

In game terms, the Alaska would fill a niche very similar to the Scharnhorst. However, its guns would be a bit more powerful in exchange for weaker armor. From a technical perspective, the Alaska's guns have roughly equivalent citadel penetration capability than the New Mexico's, but only do around 3/4 as much damage. Its armor is also significantly less than a New Mexico's. This would place it roughly in the tier 6 premium battleship category, and they would be played similarly to a North Carolina, where you would have to angle your ship to avoid being citadeled.

 

I considered whether the Alaska should be tier 7 or higher, but realized its armor and armament combination would not allow it to compete at higher tiers. It is very much to tier 6 what the Scharnhorst is to tier 7.


AMD FX 8350 8x 4.0GHz

16GB G.Skill DDR3 SDRAM

Gigabyte nVidia GeForce GTX 980

4x 1TB SAS drives in RAID 10 with 256GB SSD for CacheCade, and 1x 146GB SAS drive dedicated to WoWS


XXRed_DawnXX #9 Posted 17 April 2017 - 05:51 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 61
  • Member since:
    04-09-2015

View PostSergeantHop, on 17 April 2017 - 09:02 AM, said:

What's a CR?

BB means battleship

CV means carrier

DD means destroyer

DE means destroyer escort

CR means cruiser (or at least that what I think)


Edited by XXRed_DawnXX, 17 April 2017 - 05:53 PM.

LINE OFFICER, EQUESTRIAN ROYAL NAVY

.-.. ..- -. .- / .. ... / -... . ... - / .--. .-. .. -. -.-. . ... ...

.--. .-. .- .. ... . / - .... . / -. .. --. .... -


NK_33 #10 Posted 17 April 2017 - 06:15 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Testers

  • 493
  • Member since:
    12-24-2014

Tillman class battleships

Scharnhorst and Gnieusenau (the WW1 versions)

The Powerful class cruiser

The Novgorod


Everybody just makes up quotes on the internet
- Hammurabi

Curmudgeon without portfolio


SergeantHop #11 Posted 17 April 2017 - 07:25 PM

    Captain

  • Members

  • 4,234
  • Member since:
    10-10-2012

View PostXXRed_DawnXX, on 17 April 2017 - 09:51 AM, said:

BB means battleship

CV means carrier

DD means destroyer

DE means destroyer escort

CR means cruiser (or at least that what I think)

 

CR is not a designation. Cruisers were either CL for light cruiser, CA for heavy cruiser, and CB for very heavy cruisers, in the case of Alaska, or battlecruisers in the case of everyone else.


#1 in the world for max base XP in Tirpitz

 

Check out my premium camo thread here!


IJN_Yamato_BB17 #12 Posted 17 April 2017 - 07:44 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 80
  • Member since:
    12-30-2015
The USS Johnston and the USS Samuel B Roberts, the stars of the Battle of Leyte Gulf. Also the USS Wichita and the USS Houston. The Admiral Scheer as a tech tree ship. The USS Yorktown CV-5 as a techtree ship also the USS Hornet CV-8 and maybe USS Wasp. Then there is the IJN Shinano and the Ise class battleship carrier hybrid. Maybe the KMS Seydlitz both as a Hipper class cruiser and the planned Auxiliary Carrier. Battleship Roma. To end it I would like to see more ships from the Great White Fleet because I love the color scheme.

Schroughphie #13 Posted 17 April 2017 - 10:26 PM

    Seaman

  • Members

  • 29
  • Member since:
    08-18-2016

View PostSergeantHop, on 17 April 2017 - 07:25 PM, said:

 

CR is not a designation. Cruisers were either CL for light cruiser, CA for heavy cruiser, and CB for very heavy cruisers, in the case of Alaska, or battlecruisers in the case of everyone else.

 

The designations of US warships is, at times, very complicated.  The main combat groups were B for Battleships, C for Cruisers, D for Destroyers, and S for Submarines.  The double group letter was the primary vessels:  BB, DD, SS, but Cruisers were different.

 

There were unofficial Cruiser categories: ACR for Armoured Cruiser, PC for Protected Cruisers, and C for Cruisers prior to 1920.  When the Designation System was invented in 1920 the ACRs became CA (Cruiser, Armoured (1921-1931) and later Heavy Cruiser), Light Cruisers became CL (Omaha class), Scout Cruisers became CS (Chester class),  Battlecruisers were CC, the later Alaska class were Large Cruisers - CB and not CC. Since the two of the first 3 Aircraft Carrier were converted CC (Lexington class) they got Cruiser, Aviation - CV, but they were never referred to as anything except Aircraft Carriers.  The CVs weren't split off into their own group until much later.  The Bogue was an Escort Aircraft Carrier - CVE, the Independence a Light Aircraft Carrier - CVL and the Midway was a Large Aircraft Carrier - CVB (1940s to 1952). While the Atlanta/Oakland/Juneau class were Anti-Aircraft Light Cruisers the surviving vessels did not get the CLAA designation until after WWII.

 

The entire system is rather lengthy, at times strange, and this is not the venue for the whole thing.

 

Hope this helps.


Edited by Schroughphie, 17 April 2017 - 10:57 PM.

Schroughphie (it's pronounced Scruffy)

Warden_Wolf #14 Posted 18 April 2017 - 02:00 AM

    Chief Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 176
  • Member since:
    08-27-2015
Note that, regarding the Alaska, I put a lot of work into figuring out which would be the proper tier. The guns were a little better than Scharnhorst, whereas the armor is substantially worse. It would very much fulfill a battlecruiser type role at tier 6, being fast and maneuverable but if a New Mexico or higher catches it in broadside, it's toast. It would also have a very high AA rating, possibly, as a unique ability for a "battleship" type, having defensive AA fire.

Edited by Warden_Wolf, 18 April 2017 - 02:02 AM.

AMD FX 8350 8x 4.0GHz

16GB G.Skill DDR3 SDRAM

Gigabyte nVidia GeForce GTX 980

4x 1TB SAS drives in RAID 10 with 256GB SSD for CacheCade, and 1x 146GB SAS drive dedicated to WoWS


CLUCH_CARGO #15 Posted 18 April 2017 - 08:54 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 764
  • Member since:
    11-30-2015

CR = Can't Remember

as in CRS =Can't Remember Shyt

Posted Image



 



 


XXRed_DawnXX #16 Posted 19 April 2017 - 05:11 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 61
  • Member since:
    04-09-2015
I've noticed a lot of comments regarding my designation of cruisers as "CR", I know the designations (CL = light cruiser, CA = heavy cruiser, and CB = large cruiser, etc.), but it doesn't change the fact that they'll all be marked as just cruisers in the game. Lets just focus on what ship(s) you want to see in the game.

Edited by XXRed_DawnXX, 19 April 2017 - 05:38 PM.

LINE OFFICER, EQUESTRIAN ROYAL NAVY

.-.. ..- -. .- / .. ... / -... . ... - / .--. .-. .. -. -.-. . ... ...

.--. .-. .- .. ... . / - .... . / -. .. --. .... -


XXRed_DawnXX #17 Posted 19 April 2017 - 05:19 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 61
  • Member since:
    04-09-2015

View PostCLUCH_CARGO, on 18 April 2017 - 12:54 PM, said:

CR = Can't Remember

as in CRS =Can't Remember Shyt

Posted Image

 

Hey Clutch Cargo! How's Mr. Snowshoe?

LINE OFFICER, EQUESTRIAN ROYAL NAVY

.-.. ..- -. .- / .. ... / -... . ... - / .--. .-. .. -. -.-. . ... ...

.--. .-. .- .. ... . / - .... . / -. .. --. .... -


CLUCH_CARGO #18 Posted 20 April 2017 - 12:08 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 764
  • Member since:
    11-30-2015

View PostXXRed_DawnXX, on 19 April 2017 - 11:19 AM, said:

 

Hey Clutch Cargo! How's Mr. Snowshoe?

 

View PostXXRed_DawnXX, on 19 April 2017 - 11:19 AM, said:

 

Hey Clutch Cargo! How's Mr. Snowshoe?

Mr. Snowshoe is Still around .

Posted Image    as well as Swampy   Posted Image

Posted Image     Posted Image



 



 


Umikami #19 Posted 20 April 2017 - 01:56 PM

    Lieutenant Commander

  • Beta Testers

  • 2,568
  • Member since:
    05-14-2013

View PostSergeantHop, on 17 April 2017 - 07:25 PM, said:

 

CR is not a designation. Cruisers were either CL for light cruiser, CA for heavy cruiser, and CB for very heavy cruisers, in the case of Alaska, or battlecruisers in the case of everyone else.

 

Just me asking a question Hop

I had thought the designation for battlecruiser was BC and not CB?

do you know which is actually correct?



Umikami #20 Posted 20 April 2017 - 02:00 PM

    Lieutenant Commander

  • Beta Testers

  • 2,568
  • Member since:
    05-14-2013

View PostWarden_Wolf, on 18 April 2017 - 02:00 AM, said:

Note that, regarding the Alaska, I put a lot of work into figuring out which would be the proper tier. The guns were a little better than Scharnhorst, whereas the armor is substantially worse. It would very much fulfill a battlecruiser type role at tier 6, being fast and maneuverable but if a New Mexico or higher catches it in broadside, it's toast. It would also have a very high AA rating, possibly, as a unique ability for a "battleship" type, having defensive AA fire.

 

IMHO, Alaska would stomp holes in the competition at tier 6, because she enjoyed the benefits of autoloaders on her main batteries, not to mention radar driven accuracy and mondo maneuverability.

putting her ANYWHERE lower than tier 8 (and probably tier 9 as a companion to Missouri) would be little more than blatant pay-to-win seal-clubbing.

the damn ship's just too freakin good!







Also tagged with WOWS, Premium Ships, Poll

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users