Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Mr_Alex

Anyone supporting the USS Oklahoma BB-37 as another premium BB in WOWS?

84 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

469
[-JEDI]
Alpha Tester
2,667 posts
8,151 battles

Not sure if USS Oklahoma BB-37 should be implemented in WOWS, she was basically sunk at Pearl Harbor, does anyone here support the USS Oklahoma appear in game as a premium ship in WOWS, just like the USS Arizona?

 

U3zb1B5.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,402
[SALVO]
Members
28,053 posts
41,619 battles

Already have tier 5 (USS Texas), tier 6 (USS Arizona), and tier 8 (USS Alabama) premium USN BBs.  Also have the tier 4 Arkansas Beta USN BB as well.  So it seems to me that the USN is well represented for premium BB's.  I think that there are other nations that could use some premium ship love, like Japan or the UK or Germany, or France or Italy.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,889
[HINON]
Members
7,797 posts
2,144 battles

Already have tier 5 (USS Texas), tier 6 (USS Arizona), and tier 8 (USS Alabama) premium USN BBs.  Also have the tier 4 Arkansas Beta USN BB as well.  So it seems to me that the USN is well represented for premium BB's.  I think that there are other nations that could use some premium ship love, like Japan or the UK or Germany, or France or Italy.

 

^^^^^^*

 

 

*Except for maybe Germany. They've already got 3 BB premiums

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,113
[FOXEH]
Banned
14,364 posts
23,314 battles

Already have tier 5 (USS Texas), tier 6 (USS Arizona), and tier 8 (USS Alabama) premium USN BBs.  Also have the tier 4 Arkansas Beta USN BB as well.  So it seems to me that the USN is well represented for premium BB's.  I think that there are other nations that could use some premium ship love, like Japan or the UK or Germany, or France or Italy.

 

or how about a premium that is NOT a battleship?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,043
[SALTY]
Members
8,930 posts
18,131 battles

I'll pass.

 

I can't see her playstyle offering anything unique compared to Texas, Arizona, or New Mexico.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,343
[NG-NL]
Members
7,138 posts
12,568 battles

Sure, if sequential fire on this premium results in more accurate shots than full broadside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
501 posts
12,753 battles

Maybe later on, I think other nations should take priority over the US for now, the American premiums are well represented for now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
173
[SHLMO]
Members
298 posts
896 battles

gimme a break

USN have so many premium ships right now

give a chance to other nation ship to show up 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
2,409 posts
8,275 battles

No thanks. As others have already stated, the USN already has at least 4 BB premiums and this one doesn't seem to offer anything that isn't already available via the ones we already have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,115
Alpha Tester
2,552 posts

My heart longs for her sister ship USS Nevada, the only BB that was able to set sail that fateful day. But either will do for me. :)

 

Edit: This would make for a very nice co-op mission. Escape the harbor from waves of Japanese air attacks!

 

efbc3b61a2436c7c8751ce07e8326257.jpg

Edited by Wolcott
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,728
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
17,538 posts
12,810 battles

Already have tier 5 (USS Texas), tier 6 (USS Arizona), and tier 8 (USS Alabama) premium USN BBs.  Also have the tier 4 Arkansas Beta USN BB as well.  So it seems to me that the USN is well represented for premium BB's.  I think that there are other nations that could use some premium ship love, like Japan or the UK or Germany, or France or Italy.

 

I have to agree with this, even though I am a USN fan.  Other nations need some ships more than we need another premium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,140
[MCWF]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,026 posts
29,091 battles

I'm easy to please.  If it was built in steel, I want it in World of Warships.

 

So you are not a fan of most of the Soviet ships :trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
5,281 posts
12,191 battles

I believe that eventually, we should have ships and all representing each state given you could fit them all in game between tech trees and premiums (I want to see a branch out that puts Pennsylvania in the tech tree). Cities is a harder sell. But rotate them every so often and likely find ways to differentiate between possible builds, any tweaks one got, etc. 

 

That said, USN BB's, let alone premiums, should be a bit further back on the burner. We have UK CV's were adding, plus their BB line, we have some nations that still need filling out in at minimum France and Italy, 4 more potential lines of CV's after UK, much as Wargaming makes excuses like "lack of airplanes" to which my response is still "look at every other conversion of land based aircraft ever", especially given that of the classes CV's have the least representation of all of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,245
[SVF]
Members
2,916 posts
2,776 battles

We have UK CV's were adding,

 

RN CVs are going to be rather problematic imo, since a quick wiki search shows me that hanger sizes never really get beyond A Hull Ranger capacity.  Which means either a Saipan situation where they get higher tier aircraft than they otherwise would, or ahistorically huge hanger sizes.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,455
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
3,985 posts
2,373 battles

Its exactly the same class as Arizona/ New Mexico

 

No, not exactly the same.  Oklahoma was a Nevada-class.  Arizona (Pennsylvania) and New Mexico are two separate classes that followed.

 

I won't blame someone for mixing up the Standards, as they do share a number of similar characteristics, but the actual line of progression is:

Nevada>Pennsylvania>New Mexico>Tennessee>Colorado.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
7,130 posts
7,306 battles

mmm I feel that it should be pointed out.

 

There's a good chance the US will get another Battleship line at some point with the Nevada and friends in it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,759
[RLGN]
Members
19,136 posts
35,167 battles

I'm easy to please.  If it was built in steel, I want it in World of Warships.

 

I like what mouse says, but can also agree with others who have said the USN has plenty of premium battleships; let other nations get some love.

 

I would want Oklahoma, (and also USS Nevada,) because of the ship's history, because I've read about the ship and the salvage operation quite a bit; because I've been to see the memorial on Ford Island; the mast remnant at the USS Batfish Military Park in Muskogee, Oklahoma, and because I've LIVED in Oklahoma for most of my life.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
403 posts
17,129 battles

I'm easy to please.  If it was built in steel, I want it in World of Warships.

 

Exactly. Couldn't have said it better. Bring on USS Oklahoma and the USN Battleship classes that fought in WWII not yet represented. Tennessee, Nevada, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,887
[NSF]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,304 posts
9,284 battles

 

RN CVs are going to be rather problematic imo, since a quick wiki search shows me that hanger sizes never really get beyond A Hull Ranger capacity.  Which means either a Saipan situation where they get higher tier aircraft than they otherwise would, or ahistorically huge hanger sizes.

 

 

Then again, starting the with Illustrious they are also the most well protected armored carriers tier for tier. Later designs uninhibited by the pre-war treaties also had relatively large hangars,  although still never approaching the numbers an Essex or later Midway could carry.

 

Personally I think you could start the line at Hermes, use Eagle at tier 5, move on to the inter-war Glorious in one of her many forms at tier 6, stick the Illustrious class as tier 7 and sell a premium HMS Victorious in her "USS Robin" livery. Ark Royal would take the 8 slot, with 9 and 10 being the Audacious and Implacable respectively.

 

Why have the older Ark Royal a tier above the newer Illustrious?

 

Simple: hangar capacity. Illustrious/premium Victorious would be absolutely boned as tier 8s no matter what planes you give them, and they also don't weigh enough for much of an HP pool when compared to the relatively massive Lexington and Shokaku.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
7,130 posts
7,306 battles

 

Then again, starting the with Illustrious they are also the most well protected armored carriers tier for tier. Later designs uninhibited by the pre-war treaties also had relatively large hangars,  although still never approaching the numbers an Essex or later Midway could carry.

 

Personally I think you could start the line at Hermes, use Eagle at tier 5, move on to the inter-war Glorious in one of her many forms at tier 6, stick the Illustrious class as tier 7 and sell a premium HMS Victorious in her "USS Robin" livery. Ark Royal would take the 8 slot, with 9 and 10 being the Audacious and Implacable respectively.

 

Why have the older Ark Royal a tier above the newer Illustrious?

 

Simple: hangar capacity. Illustrious/premium Victorious would be absolutely boned as tier 8s no matter what planes you give them, and they also don't weigh enough for much of an HP pool when compared to the relatively massive Lexington and Shokaku.

 

Well it's a design choice.

 

The US preferred longer ranged, faster and having more ability to fight for longer (I.E. more Planes) Carriers to the British which deemed protection more important than Aircraft capacity.

 

Think about it like a P-51 vs a Spitfire, You can't exactly claim which one is better because they were literally designed for entirely different roles.

 

You'll see it at a variety of levels between nations, like why the British usually have better DDs for a Gunfight than the US would but the US DDs were better in terms of AA and ASW warfare.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
5,281 posts
12,191 battles

EDIT: Ate my post, not retyping it all, but no they won't be landcollector

 

This makes interesting reading.

 

It is the Royal Navy's Aircraft Carrier Handbook, 1943 (with 1945 annotations).

 

It calls the Audacious class Ark Royal, but that is because originally the first ship was to be given the Ark Royal name, but that changed.

 

 

2016-03-04%2014.47.38.jpg

 

2016-03-04%2015.00.55.jpg

 

2016-03-04%2015.02.38.jpg

 

 

Basically, multiple combinations on there, namely that for tier 8 aircraft candidates, actually comes out around 88-101 aircraft, factoring in slightly bigger aircraft on the tier 9 candidates, maybe 90. And that's not counting the even bigger Malta class that was planned and more similar to Midway. Only crazy thing would be that These ships here and had it been built Malta could have, and even Illustrious class, operated twin engine Mosquito's and Hornets, or rather their Navalized variants, from their decks. But considering we got B-25's off, and eventually back on, carrier decks, yeah.

 

Also, yeah, the guy that said it'd be another Arizona and NM is so bloody wrong it's not even funny and I'm not typing all the ways it's wrong back up.

Edited by WanderingGhost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
148
[HINON]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
894 posts
3,949 battles

Already have tier 5 (USS Texas), tier 6 (USS Arizona), and tier 8 (USS Alabama) premium USN BBs.  Also have the tier 4 Arkansas Beta USN BB as well.  So it seems to me that the USN is well represented for premium BB's.  I think that there are other nations that could use some premium ship love, like Japan or the UK or Germany, or France or Italy.

 

Much as I want Oklahoma, I do think it can wait until they eventually introduce a second BB tree.  I'm patient. ;) 

 

These two statements say it all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×