Jump to content

ryuukei8569

Members
  • Content Сount

    2,725
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    8293
  • Clan

    [HRDP]

Community Reputation

578 Excellent

1 Follower

About ryuukei8569

  • Rank
    Lieutenant Commander
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

648 profile views
  1. ryuukei8569

    Update from WG Fest: Soviet Battleships line

    I dont really see how it is logic breaking for the French 17 inch gun to have a MV of 840 mps. Its on the high end sure, but its not some crazy excessive 1000 mps velocity or something equally insane. The USN 18/48 in its original configuration had a MV of 823 mps, which is pretty close in velocity while being a larger gun. Really the french 17 inch only breaks down when you look at the reload stat of 24 seconds, which is very short for that caliber. But I understand why Wargaming did it, they wanted to move away form the Montana clones that T10 Battleships where beginning to make a habit of becoming, but balancing 8 or 9 gun ships at T10 without overmatch is very very hard. They outright failed with conqueror, though I think they just didn't try hard enough. IMO they should have found a way to balance conqueror around the 18 inch guns instead of just slapping on the 419's at the last minute. But I would contend that Republique was the wrong design for the French T10, and what we should have gotten was a super Alsace with 4 quad 15 inch turrets. Although in all reality, the french where preparing to abandon the quad turret arrangement, so if they ever did try to build a 70,000 ton battleship, it would have very likely been a 4 x 3 16 inch design or a 3 x 3 17/18 inch design. I dont know what they will do with the Italian T10. Given that the Italians never used quads, the 4 x 4 15 inch proposal is unlikely, and they did develop plans for a 16 inch three gun turret, so id imagine that RM Montana is a pretty tempting design to go for. Generally while wargaming is quite happy to come up with completely fake designs for their tech tree's, they do try and find data on the guns that might be used, and the French did have plans for a 17 inch gun. The italians to my knowledge, never planned anything larger than 16 inch, which means Montana clone is their most likely T10. And guess what, the Game is all about balance anyway, just because a ship is paper or steel is not an excuse to make it underpowered or overpowered.
  2. ryuukei8569

    CV Rework Going Live early 2019

    To be honest, I dont expect Subs to be anywhere near the trainwreck that CV's are. At least Subs wont be hugely fundamentally different from other types. They are basically like slower, stealthier DD's with fewer torps and are more fragile, but can make themselves immune to most forms of damage for short periods of time. CV's are just so fundamentally different from everything else in the game, that balancing them is insanely difficult.
  3. ryuukei8569

    Project 24 aka Kreml size

    The Dev's did say that she isn't quite as long as Großer Kurfurst, but displaces slightly higher, so she may end up with lightly more HP than kurfurst, and of course will likely feature soviet armored bow. But I do see her firepower being the weakest, as 457 mm doesn't overmatch like 460 mm because 3 mm of difference is such a huge difference. I expect the 406's will get some crazy reload to compensate for only having nine of them. The only issue with Conquerors 457's is only having eight of them with no overmatch. Their penetration power is excellent, the HE absurd and the accuracy really good. But only having eight guns made her DPM too low. Republic had the exact same problem in testing, which is what got her the 24 second reload and 8 km base secondary range. Without some special autobounce angles, Overmatch, absurdly fast reloads or absurdly powerful shells, 8 or 9 guns just doesn't cut it at T10, and Pr.24 wont get the overmatch advantage. So the only way for the 9 guns of Pr 24 to overcme the weakness of having 9 guns is absurdly powerful shells or sub 30 second reloads.
  4. ryuukei8569

    Update from WG Fest: Soviet Battleships line

    Oh, then you have never had the distinction of playing the Izumo, or the pre buff Ibuki, pre buff FDG, Seattle, Phoenix, Yorck upon release, pre Buff Myogi, Open Beta Montana. Yeah, being paper does not exclude a ship from sucking.
  5. ryuukei8569

    Update from WG Fest: Soviet Battleships line

    Im just kinda bummed that they took this long to announce a new line, which means we are likely at least three months away from release, if not longer. Wargaming has gotten very slow releasing new lines lately.
  6. ryuukei8569

    Montana should get a speed nerf

    Against AP shells, no Conqueror is pretty much just as well protected as Montana. At the ranges fought in the game, inclined armor means very little and raw belt thickness is not very useful. Raw belt armor is of little use in this game where angling is what really matters as well as hull plating and citadel Size. Raw belt armor thickness is fairly useless when fighting other BB's, as the in game ranges are too short. Conquerors protection fall apart when dealing with HE spam or Yamato/Musashi, but that's because of the 32 mm plating everywhere. In that respect, Montana is superior, but she is laughably behind GK. GK with the incremental armor scheme is the toughest ship when bow on or close to it, and the most HE spam resistant of the lot. The only problem with GK's survivability is her very bad turret angles forcing her to give more broadside than conqueror and Montana to use all the guns. But when angled the same as Montana, she is by far more survivable to everything. And Of course, Montana doesn't have Conquerors Zombie heal.
  7. ryuukei8569

    Montana should get a speed nerf

    Montana still has the second most vulnerable citadel of any T10 battleship. GK and Conqueror are virtually immune to them, and republic gets them once in a blue moon. Yamato is the only one with a more vulnerable citadel at T10, but in return Yamato also has a much thicker weather deck that also covers more of the top deck, the strongest TDS out of T10, and the overmatch capability of the guns.
  8. ryuukei8569

    Montana should get a speed nerf

    I'm good with this, but only if Montana was also given her historical armor values, such as the 57 mm weather deck and 178 mm main deck. Also 7 k base secondaries as the 5'54 was explicitly designed for longer range surface fire than the 38's. Normandie would like to have a word with you on that.
  9. And its hard for a BB pushing into a cap and all your cruisers and DD's bail on you, leaving you alone and unable to retreat to die. When I play BB's i rarely commit to early caps without having a damn good idea where the enemy team is at, because BB's have the least ability to withdraw from a bad situation, due to being the slowest, biggest and the most visible. Plus different BB's have different capabilities. German BB's, sure those are great for pushing Caps. Yamato, pushing a cap in Yamato is just stupid with that sky high citadel. Plus Yamato has stupid accurate guns. French BB's, no, just no, may to fragile for that. French BB's are fast flankers, not cap pushers. American and British BB's, you can get away with it, but its situational. I mean come on, you wouldn't try and aggressively push into a cap with a Kahbarovsk or an IJN Torpedo DD when the enemy team's good gunboat DD's are alive. Thats just darwin award behavior.
  10. ryuukei8569

    Well..Wikipedia dun [edited] up!

    Which wasn't that unique of a though process for the Japanese high command and government in general. They all knew that the US industrial advantage was insurmountable, it didn't take a military genius to know that. That's why imperial Japan's plan was basically defeat US pacific fleet an a decisive battle, hopefully discouraging America by convincing the war would cot to much, then sue for peace and hope they could keep some of their captured territory.
  11. ryuukei8569

    Well..Wikipedia dun [edited] up!

    I would pint out that the japanese leadership to the atomic bombs was of general apathy, and realistically to them, there wasn't much difference between the atomic bombs and the firebombings. Its also worth noting that after Hiroshima and Nagasaki where leveled, there wasn't really any large Japanese cities left standing anymore, as the firebombings had done their work quite effectively. Really what finally convinced the Japanese to surrender unconditionally was the Soviet union Declaring war on them, and because of that, they knew there was no way they would get a negotiated settlement anymore. They where really hoping to get a conditional surrender with Stalin as the mediator.
  12. ryuukei8569

    Is Buffalo Good?

    It may be because buffalo is a little less allergic to Battleship AP than Des Moines. Des Moines has an Xbox Huge Citadel that sits way above the waterline extending from the Front of No.1 Turret all the way Behind No.3 Turret. Buffalo's Citadel by contrast, is only above the waterline from under the forward 5 inch mount to the aft 5 inch mount, so DM's above water citadel is nearly twice the length of Buffallo's. The Magazine citadel for Buffalo is way underwater , and the two forward Barbette's help protect the ship from nose in citadels, while the two rear Barbette's help protect the rear citadel. DM certainly has the firepower advantage, but she dies to BB AP faster.
  13. ryuukei8569

    Is Buffalo Good?

    Well she isn't as horrifically bad as Seattle, but she does not break the T9 trend of meh ships. But as mentioned, few T9 ships are any good. If there is ever a Tier that desperately needs love, its T9. That being said I do consider Buffalo a better ship than the old T9 Baltimore, but that's not saying much.
  14. ryuukei8569

    Well..Wikipedia dun [edited] up!

    Hello Chimera2, welcome to the internet.
  15. ryuukei8569

    Well..Wikipedia dun [edited] up!

    Well and as I mentioned, it really depended on who it was in regards to their reasons for fighting. Your average poor white farmer, whom couldn't afford slaves to begin with, for the most part didn't give a damn about the slavery issue at all. And some would no doubt be all for getting rid of slavery, because it would tear some of the economic power away from the large plantations and actually allow the small farmer some chance to compete on the open market. And some fought for the confederates simply out of loyalty for their state, not because they where genuinely interested in preserving slavery, so not every confederate was fighting for slavery. But nearly all the people with the actual political power and wealth in the south where. Of course what was really happening in the north was the industrial revolution, and mechanization would soon render traditional Slavery uneconomical. By freeing a bunch of former slaves and "hiring" them for the factories in the North, was no doubt an attractive idea for the Northern industrial capitalists of the time.
×