Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Prkl8r

Royal Sovereign the reason RN BBs are OP

10 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

203
Beta Testers
741 posts
2,149 battles

Hear me out here, maybe they made RN BBs overpowered because that way, when they inevitably add Royal Sovereign in as a Russian Premium BB as Arkhangelsk which will play like an RN BB, they have an excuse as to why it's so good.

 

Of course they will wait to nerf RN BBs until this ship is released.

 

That way it will stay powerful, as we all know they won't nerf premiums.

 

/Tinfoil hat

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
203
Beta Testers
741 posts
2,149 battles

Btw, this was a joke, I don't even think the ships are really OP, just annoying to play against.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,043 posts
10,248 battles
41 minutes ago, Prkl8r said:

Btw, this was a joke, I don't even think the ships are really OP, just annoying to play against.

Joke aside, that wouldn't surprise a lot of folks familiar with Wargaming.

There's a good reason, I expect, as to why the R-class wasn't included in this line of British battleships. Speculation based on the history of WoT would seem to indicate that there may well be future secondary—and possibly tertiary—lines for various ship types, which means the R-class battleships might make an appearance in a second or third (after the RN battlecruisers in 2019/2020) line at or around Tier VI. The thing is, if you thought Warspite and QE were a bit on the pokey side, the R-class was worse, almost as bad as the U.S. Navy's Standard battleships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
203
Beta Testers
741 posts
2,149 battles

Well if they did put in Arkhangelsk, they should go realistic with it and make it's turrets not turn due to lack of maintenance by the Russian crew.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
650 posts
1,842 battles
Just now, Prkl8r said:

Well if they did put in Arkhangelsk, they should go realistic with it and make it's turrets not turn due to lack of maintenance by the Russian crew.

 

Beat me to it. 

 

But yeah, I can see WG doing exactly this, no joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,169
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
9,313 posts
18,914 battles

Hmm, they didn't make the entire USN cruiser line OP, just to have an OP Murmansk...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
203
Beta Testers
741 posts
2,149 battles
2 minutes ago, mofton said:

Hmm, they didn't make the entire USN cruiser line OP, just to have an OP Murmansk...

Idk, back in beta the Omaha was a great ship. Doesn't really stand up now though, at least not like it did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
650 posts
1,842 battles
4 minutes ago, mofton said:

Hmm, they didn't make the entire USN cruiser line OP, just to have an OP Murmansk...

 

Nope. They were more brazen about it and gave the Murmansk buffs apparently conferred just by its heroic Soviet banner. 

 

I think they've gotten clever-er since then though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
203
Beta Testers
741 posts
2,149 battles
4 minutes ago, Middcore said:

 

Nope. They were more brazen about it and gave the Murmansk buffs apparently conferred just by its heroic Soviet banner. 

 

I think they've gotten clever-er since then though.

That's true it was randomly better than Omaha for "reasons."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
11,728 posts

 

 

Most likely will come to the game anyway --- as the Royal Sovereign herself, given that both Duca d'Aosta and the Guilio Cesare came to the game as their original selves, not Soviet premiums. 

 

My theory is that the models for these Soviet premiums were already done but WG changed their policy to preferring using indigenous ships as Russian premiums instead (discontinuation of Murmansk as Krasnyi Krym takes its place).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×