Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
squidage

Texas Torps?

19 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

17
[BL4CK]
Members
144 posts
5,441 battles

So went to see the USS Texas over the weekend and found out that it has torpedoes so why are they not in the game? Would LOVE to be playing the Texas and then just SUPRISE submerged 21' torps go

 

is this just me or would anyone else get a kick out of this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
2,902 posts
6,252 battles

Wargaming has come out before, underwater torpedo tubes are a no go.  Plus, her current configuration is after her 1925 refit received at the Norfolk naval yards IIRC.  AA was increased and the torpedo tubes were removed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17
[BL4CK]
Members
144 posts
5,441 battles

Wargaming has come out before, underwater torpedo tubes are a no go.  Plus, her current configuration is after her 1925 refit received at the Norfolk naval yards IIRC.  AA was increased and the torpedo tubes were removed. 

 

i know that as it is now was after the refit just saying how fun would it be to just pop out some torps in these glacer slow bbs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
328
[SWOB]
[SWOB]
Alpha Tester
1,147 posts
6,651 battles

They're pretty useless anyway, the reason they were removed from most battleships after WW1 is that they compromised the defensive systems by creating holes and voids exactly where you want to have strong armour and they also meant putting several hundred kilograms of high explosive in a location that was reasonably likely to be hit by incoming fire if things went wrong.  They only made sense when naval architects and the admiralty thought that most fleet combat would take place at ranges of several thousand metres, not at the ranges that were actually encountered even in WW1 let alone WW2.  I'm definitely happy that they don't simulate torpedo detonations on cruisers and destroyers as it is, you think people get testy about the current detonation mechanics...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,003 posts
1,451 battles

They're pretty useless anyway, the reason they were removed from most battleships after WW1 is that they compromised the defensive systems by creating holes and voids exactly where you want to have strong armour and they also meant putting several hundred kilograms of high explosive in a location that was reasonably likely to be hit by incoming fire if things went wrong.  They only made sense when naval architects and the admiralty thought that most fleet combat would take place at ranges of several thousand metres, not at the ranges that were actually encountered even in WW1 let alone WW2.  I'm definitely happy that they don't simulate torpedo detonations on cruisers and destroyers as it is, you think people get testy about the current detonation mechanics...

 

But when I rake over your half inch steel armor with 9 2700 pound shells it should cause you to explode....especially when those shells are HE.....lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
964
[PLPT]
Members
4,435 posts
6,599 battles

Wargaming has come out before, underwater torpedo tubes are a no go.  Plus, her current configuration is after her 1925 refit received at the Norfolk naval yards IIRC.  AA was increased and the torpedo tubes were removed. 

 

I believe Mutsu has under water torpedo tubes, doesn't it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,377 posts
16,938 battles

They're pretty useless anyway, the reason they were removed from most battleships after WW1 is that they compromised the defensive systems by creating holes and voids exactly where you want to have strong armour and they also meant putting several hundred kilograms of high explosive in a location that was reasonably likely to be hit by incoming fire if things went wrong.  They only made sense when naval architects and the admiralty thought that most fleet combat would take place at ranges of several thousand metres, not at the ranges that were actually encountered even in WW1 let alone WW2.  I'm definitely happy that they don't simulate torpedo detonations on cruisers and destroyers as it is, you think people get testy about the current detonation mechanics...

 

And yet WG leaves the unprotected citadel space from them on Warspite-even though not only are they not used in game, they were removed by that refit... :fishpalm:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
105
[_TWP_]
Members
611 posts
6,839 battles

I believe Mutsu has under water torpedo tubes, doesn't it? 

 

Mutsu had both submerged and above-water torpedo tubes. The ship as-modeled appears to only have the above-water tubes.

 

EDIT: http://i.imgur.com/5wPZr17.jpg

Edited by BGolightly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
964
[PLPT]
Members
4,435 posts
6,599 battles

 

Mutsu had both submerged and above-water torpedo tubes. The ship as-modeled appears to only have the above-water tubes.

 

EDIT: http://i.imgur.com/5wPZr17.jpg

 

Oh, very interesting. I'm looking forward to being able to test this ship out. Should be fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45
[SOSL]
Members
147 posts
7,641 battles

They're pretty useless anyway, the reason they were removed from most battleships after WW1 is that they compromised the defensive systems by creating holes and voids exactly where you want to have strong armour and they also meant putting several hundred kilograms of high explosive in a location that was reasonably likely to be hit by incoming fire if things went wrong.  They only made sense when naval architects and the admiralty thought that most fleet combat would take place at ranges of several thousand metres, not at the ranges that were actually encountered even in WW1 let alone WW2.  I'm definitely happy that they don't simulate torpedo detonations on cruisers and destroyers as it is, you think people get testy about the current detonation mechanics...

 

Not only were they a defensive liability, but in practice they proved utterly worthless even as offensive weapons. I don't think there's a single instance of a battleship ever using its submerged tubes for anything useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
105
[_TWP_]
Members
611 posts
6,839 battles

Not only were they a defensive liability, but in practice they proved utterly worthless even as offensive weapons. I don't think there's a single instance of a battleship ever using its submerged tubes for anything useful.

 

The only notable use of battleship torpedoes that I can think of offhand is Rodney's use of torpedoes against Bismarck ... which probably doesn't count as "useful".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0
[AOWAR]
Members
2 posts

So went to see the USS Texas over the weekend and found out that it has torpedoes so why are they not in the game? Would LOVE to be playing the Texas and then just SUPRISE submerged 21' torps go

 

is this just me or would anyone else get a kick out of this

 

​Not to mention that the Texas also had a catapult on the middle turret.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45
[SOSL]
Members
147 posts
7,641 battles

​Not to mention that the Texas also had a catapult on the middle turret.

 

Arizona also had a catapult on it's #3 turret that's not modeled in game. I think that's likely an engine limitation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
180
[TSG4R]
[TSG4R]
Members
972 posts
5,062 battles

 

 

The only notable use of battleship torpedoes that I can think of offhand is Rodney's use of torpedoes against Bismarck ... which probably doesn't count as "useful".

 

This is generally considered to be the only successful use of a torpedo in actual combat by a battleship in history.  It's also worth noting that the only significant damage Rodney took during the engagement with Bismarck was flooding through one of her submerged torpedo ports (caused by a 15" near-miss by Bismarck). This supports the argument that having submerged torpedo tubes came with certain risks for BBs.  The Nelson class were some of only a few BBs that were still carrying torpedo armament by WWII.

 

The aforementioned Mutsu lost her torpedoes in a 1934 refit; if images show that the torps are included in the WoWs version of the ship,  this may give us some clue as to at what point in her history WoWs plans to represent her in game.  Among other things, a pre-1934 Mutsu would be very AA-weak.  Her armor and main battery were also upgraded in the 1934 refit.

Edited by ForgMaxtor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
964
[PLPT]
Members
4,435 posts
6,599 battles

 

 

This is generally considered to be the only successful use of a torpedo in actual combat by a battleship in history.  It's also worth noting that the only significant damage Rodney took during the engagement with Bismarck was flooding through one of her submerged torpedo ports (caused by a 15" near-miss by Bismarck). This supports the argument that having submerged torpedo tubes came with certain risks for BBs.  The Nelson class were some of only a few BBs that were still carrying torpedo armament by WWII.

 

The aforementioned Mutsu lost her torpedoes in a 1934 refit; if images show that the torps are included in the WoWs version of the ship,  this may give us some clue as to at what point in her history WoWs plans to represent her in game.  Among other things, a pre-1934 Mutsu would be very AA-weak.  Her armor and main battery were also upgraded in the 1934 refit.

 

We're talking about in game. The Mutsu we'll be getting is at tier six, and is effectively a stock Nagato. The torpedo tubes will be included in game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×