Jump to content

CSSBT

Members
  • Content Сount

    57
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    5678

Community Reputation

9 Neutral

About CSSBT

  • Rank
    Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

376 profile views
  1. I think there's already a Soviet version of the Nuremberg in game. Also I think a version of the Hipper class with 12 150mm guns was under consideration. It would've kind of been a German CL Mogami... Might be an interesting ship to have in game also...
  2. The preliminaries for the Myokos must be from the 1920s. Back then the Japanese had a thing of overloading their ships with weapons without an appropriate increase to their displacement or beam. So some of the ships became top heavy. I'd imagine quad turrets won't help with that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4th_Fleet_(Imperial_Japanese_Navy)#The_Fourth_Fleet_incident I think if we are looking at cruisers with DD caliber guns, maybe the British Dido class and similar ships should be introduced first as they were real and in service. They might work out like a hybrid between the Leander and Atlanta with 5.25" guns...
  3. That Italian design looks beautiful. If you look at the drawing on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyon-class_battleship That's the configuration of the Lyon I was referring to. It can bring 8 guns to bear forward. And speaking of the 90mm DP guns the Italians have, I suspect they are next to useless for surface combat cause they shoot HE and gets 1/6 of caliber pen? So essentially they become weaker than the 100mms on the Alsace. From what I've read, the Japanese seemed to like the 100mms so much that the Shinano and later BB versions of the Yamato got those instead of the 127mms. Their good AA apparently made the Akizukis well liked later in the war. I think the torp boat DDs the Japanese had didn't work out too well for them after 1943.
  4. I've always wished that the French tier 10 BB had a 4x4 380mm setup. I don't know if WG would be willing to do a line split at tier 9 for it they way they did for the WZ111 5a and 113 in WOT. Also I wish if the Lyon had 2 super-firing pairs of quad turrets rather than having a middle one like some drawings suggest.
  5. If the turret farm style CL have to essentially be a WG fabrication, then the situation is less than ideal. But putting the CL44 at tier 6 might make sense as WG sometimes would make the speculative or unrealized variants in as tech tree ships while the historical version shows up as a prem, like what happened with the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau. And I think the Japanese essentially didn't employ 6 inch armed cruisers as front line units they way they did with the heavy cruisers in 1942. Their CLs seem to be more like destroyer leaders or command/headquarter ships for submarines and such...
  6. I've always thought that the Tone would be introduced as an all forward mounted 8x203mm CA with an unique aviation set up, which might be similar to or a trail run of how WG might wanna introduce Ise class BB/CV hybrids. But I think the Agano would be undergunned at tier 6 with 6 152mms vs. the Dallas' 10 and the Budyonny's 9. Even the Leander has 8 guns and it also has excellent agility, single torps, hydro, and smoke to help it... I doubt the Agano would be as fragile as the Nuremberg though, which tends to randomly blow up when someone sneeze near it. Splitting the Mogami might also be a contentious issue. Also the Japanese seem to prefer CAs over CLs, so anything beyond the Mogami are paper ships? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_cruiser_Ōyodo This might work better than the Agano at tier 6.
  7. The problem with the IJN Cl line is that the Agano and Oyodo both only have 6x155mm or 152mm guns. The oyodo seems to have a significant float plane facility. I think the 2 might work out okay at tier 5 and 6 but no higher than that. Sendai and Nagara classes before the Agano class were fairly similar to the Kuma with an fairly exposed and thin citadel and WW1 style single gun mounts. I doubt these CL can be made to work at above tier 5. Unless WG wanna revisit the Kitakami idea. The Italians did not have radar help when it comes to AA. Their AA weapons were probably not nearly as advanced as the 40mm Bofors or American 3"s, or other late war or post war AA systems like the 6 barreled Bofors on the UK ships, 55mms on the GK, or the early cold war era stuff the Soviets have... The concern is that they might end up being as vulnerable as a high tier Japanese ships that relies on their 25mms for AA DPS. (I know the Zao has 40mms) Apparently the Littorio class had fighters without floats available and they had to land back on land after launch. From my experience the Kongo's secondary don't seem to do much even with AFT. The Konig seems to have the best secondary set up in practice at tier 5 for a BB. The first Japanese BB with secondaries that you can rely on seems to be the Nagato...
  8. I've always feared that the Italian ships are gonna be CV food cause they seem to be behind other nations in that regard in real life. They were also behind in terms of radar and electronics in general. I don't know how that can be reflected in game. I found an image of that version of the Kron. I've attached it to this. The Kongo only has a 8 inch belt while the Amagi has a 10 inch belt. I think the thickness itself isn't a deal breaker. If anything design configuration of the ship might matter more...
  9. It's totally fine. I tend to enjoy discussions on here even if it kind of goes off the rails sometimes. lol
  10. Stalingrad as is in game seems to be a BB sized target without BB armor. But Flint, Black, and Missouri are nasty to play against. From a BB player's perspective, the Zao is more durable than Hindy and the DM. Hindy can be tanky if it's angled but when broadside it eats regular pens and at range plunging fire goes right into its citadel through the deck and turtleback. DM's guns forces it to engage at a relative close range, like 12km or less. If it's not bow tanking and just sitting them farming damage, it's free BB food. Zao for some reason is made of no damage pens and overpens when you hit it with BB AP.
  11. This is awesome information. Although I think in terms of firepower, protection, and mobility, neither one of the 2 very "heavy cruisers" are inferior to something like a Kongo. I don't quite know where WG draws the line classifying ships in between cruisers and BBs. Also I must say that the tier 7 looks like a beefier and angrier Normandie, while the tiers 8 to 10 all seem strong.
  12. It seems that the data suggest that the Kronstadt like the Stalingrad have an extremely powerful propulsion system that spits out well over 200k hp. Maybe much of their displacement were dedicated to mobility rather than protection and firepower. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kronshtadt-class_battlecruiser https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalingrad-class_battlecruiser They should be the same 12 inchers off the October Revolution except it's a faster ship that carries 2 less barrels. Maybe the reload can be faster than on the October Revolution. The fictional aspect of the German BB line most revolves around the fictional WW2 era modernization schemes found on the Kaiser, Konig, Bayern, and that new tier 6 prem battlecruiser. Although it's true that I find certain aspects of FDG and GK's implementation questionable. I think the tier 4 and 5 were in service while the tier 6, 7, 8, and 9 were partially built and then scrapped unfinished. I think the most unbalanced Russian cruiser is the Kutuzov. That range, DPM, and smoke is a nasty combo. But if anything that's more of a premium ships being too good problem than a Russian problem, cause the Atlanta, Atago, and Murmansk are also stronger than their tech tree counterparts. The Moskva is the easiest tier 10 cruiser to fight against in a BB. Its citadel is huge and sits very high and exposed. It lacks 32mm plating to cover it from being freak penned...
  13. As a someone who primarily plays BBs, I've always kept an eye on the development and eventual introduction of new BB lines to the game. As of right now, off the top of my head, there seem to be actual ships available to fill several yet to be introduced lines, including: a British 2nd BB or battlecruiser line, a German battlecruiser line that might have no actual ships to fill in at above tier 8, a Japanese 2nd BB line featuring ships cancelled by the treaties and/or those that couldn't be built (like the replacement for the Kongos), an Italian BB line, and maybe just maybe a Russian/Soviet BB line. Out of all of those lines, I find the Russian/Soviet line to be the most elusive and potentially tricky to implement obviously due to historical facts and circumstances. But considering WG's background, I doubt a Russian/Soviet BB line is something they would be willing to give up on easily. (Unless they wanna go down the free xp or pay to win route ) As player, I think having such tech tree line might add good and welcomed content to the game, as BBs are relatively rare in comparison to smaller ships in history. It seems that some of the previous discussions on the forums and online on this topic point to a tree that roughly works out like this: Tier 3 - some variant of a prototype dreadnought or semi-dreadnought (as the Nikolai and ships similar to it might be too strong for tier 3, while Andrei Pervozvanny class pre-dreadnoughts might be too weak?) Tier 4 & 5 - variants or versions of the Gangut and/or Imperatritsa Mariya classes of dreadnoughts in different stages of modernization both historical or speculative Tier 6 - Borodino class battlecruisers: 4x3 356mm main battery and capable of 26.5 knots before modernization Tier 7 - Kronshtadt class battlecruiser, or a version of it: a configuration of the ship that uses 3x2 380mm German guns was mentioned? (it kind of becomes a Russian Gneisenau in game?) Tier 8 - Stalingrad class battlecruiser, or a version of it: it seems that the plan is to make them stand out as fast and having higher DPM than typical BBs in exchange for their marginal armor and smaller gun caliber? Tier 9 - Sovetsky Soyuz class battleship: it'll be the highest HP (60K ston displacement) and tankiest BB at tier 9, although probably also the slowest (28 knots) and a big target for HE spam? Tier 10 - Project 24 battleship (super Sovetsky Soyuz): this could get tricky in regards to the game's meta depending on how the ship's implemented. I've read that the ship is to be the tier 9 ship upgunned with 9x457mm guns, others mention 430mm guns, while others spoke of a design influenced by the Italians? As far as premium ships are concerned: The Novorossiysk (ex Italian battleship Giulio Cesare rearmed with Soviet 305mm guns and AA guns) should be a suitable tier 5 and fairly similar to Italian version of it (maybe with less gun alpha but higher dpm and better aa?) Meanwhile the Arkhangelsk (ex HMS Royal Sovereign) could make a decent tier 6 premium BB as a slower but better armored QE class BB? At tier 8, the Italian (Ansaldo) designed U.P. 41 battleship could also make a decent premium ship. It should be a Littorio class style BB uparmed with 3x3 406mm guns and an inferior torpedo defense system? To me, this rough idea on the line seem to work and I would love to eventually grind this line should it ever become available. But then as you all know, recently the Kronshtadt and Stalingrad have both been introduced into the game as high tier cruisers with some BB traits. That fact alone might signal the scuttling of a full tech tree BB line for the Soviets/Russians in the future. So how do you feel about this? What you think should be WG's proper plan moving forward regarding this? Can a proper Russian/Soviet BB line still work without the Kronshtadt and the Stalingrad? What have you heard about this recently? I'd love to hear from you all but would regret to miss out on this line in game...
  14. Good to know. So the Khaba's torps are kind of like mid tier Russian cruiser's torps for its tier... Its guns are hell for a BB player though. Maybe instead of removing HE from BBs, they can instead reintroduce the whole set of ammo types: top fuse HE, base fuse HE, and AP probably with base fuse also. Their fire chance, alpha strike, and pen should all be readjusted accordingly. Although this proposal might throw the performance of ship's armor completely out of whack. The radar thing also kind of goes back to the prevalence of power-creep in WG's products. It's understandable that they wanna introduce new game features and mechanics to keep people interested and draw new players in, but that tactic also has the potential to upset balance. Although I think highly specialized and strong premium vehicles is probably a bigger issue than the proliferation of radar. And of course WOT seems to suffer from even more power-creep. This is a good point and is exactly why I think radar should not work in game over hard terrain covers as if the can see through everything with no penalty.
  15. Speaking from experience, it seems that radar is why the Missouri is superior to the Iowa in game, and why my Edinburgh can never dominate like the Fuji a tier below despite being a better ship... #1 Thanks for the information. Although I don't think as of now WOWS features everything exactly or close to scale in comparison to reality. Aren't the typical engagement range for capital ships in game compressed versus in real life? Also aren't the penetration value of guns overvalued and armor thickness undervalued, and that the effect of bow plating iffy? I suspect these things didn't scale properly in game... #2 I think on Epicenter and Domination, we tend to see less of the passive slow bleed type of win or loss and I like that. But wouldn't the need to engage and eliminate the enemy be enough of an incentive to advance? #3 I'd Two Brother is the poster child of the problem I mentioned. Usually the two teams split, one team tends to win one side and the other team wins the other. Often how many ships managed to survive losing a side and the decision for a team to continue its attack or double back to defend decides the win or loss. It seems that how well can a team do any of this is rooted in how many of which ship initially went for a side... #4 Well what I said is kind of generalized but then it's just some of my observations rather than an end all style summary. #5 I agree. #6 They just seem to not use their guns when they should more often. In comparison, I rarely find a Khaba or Gearing driver not using their guns even if they play poorly otherwise... For awhile after radar was introduced, I thought that it wouldn't work around islands or at least it wouldn't work as well. But with the way it is now, radar can essentially go all the way through an island...
×