Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Lert

Some musings on Duke of York

75 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

29,641
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
22,715 posts
16,661 battles

According to this thread, DoY is likely to be a free XP ship, with a cost of 375k free XP. I still wouldn't consider this rumor set-in-stone 100% going-to-happen, but it's a very strong rumor nonetheless.

Now, I got to thinking. Why? Why make Dookie of York a free XP ship, in the state that it's in, with the consumables it has and doesn't have? Possibly to test the waters for their idea of a battlecruiser gameplay style? Could this be a hint that they're working on other battlecruisers to be in the game, specifically the famous British and German WWI ones, and that Dookie of York is a testbed for the playstyle?

But I have some concerns, some reasons for me to wish they'd do so with another ship, and not Cookie of York.

Concern the first:

There are already two British T7 battleship premiums, one premium store one, Hood, and one free XP one, Nelson. Now I can understand why they picked a sistership of a class already in the game, ease of modeling, but that doesn't mean it 'has' to be a British T7 one.

Concern the second:

HMS Vanguard is a thing that exists .... Existed ... Was bui - eh, you know what I mean. Vanguard was built, served, but doesn't appear in the tech tree. Instead, Monarch does, which is just a KGV with 15" guns. Which is basically what Vanguard was, to begin with - a modernized KGV-based hull with 4x2 15" on it. I always believed that they didn't put Vanguard in the tech tree because they were planning to make it a premium. But if Suki-yaki of Stork is introduced and thus we have three Royal Navy premium battleships already, wouldn't that eat into the potential market for Vanguard?

Concern the third:

Wolvie of G'mork (bonuspoints if you get that reference) doesn't really exemplify the battlecruiser ideal. Sure it's fast, but not as fast as a 'true' British battlecruiser. Sure its armor isn't spectacular, but it's better than a 'true' British battlecruiser. The KGV class is more of a fast battleship than a 'true' battlecruiser. Now it could just be that my 'they're testing a battlecruiser gameplay style' theory is just plain wrong, but since that theory is the basis for this thread, I figured I'd address this point.

Which leads me to:

There is another candidate for a 'true' British battlecruiser ideal gameplay style. The model already exists, so it's no extra work on the modeling team. It fits the 'true' British battlecruiser ideal better than Sushi of Pork, being both faster and softer. It's even a tier lower so it doesn't oversaturate tier 7.

I'm talking about Ashitaka.

Why not put Pookie of Dork in the cooler, adjust Ashytaco's consumables, sell her for, say, 275k free XP and see how the ball rolls from there?

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
109
[ANZAC]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
393 posts
11,104 battles

Two Free-XP ships in the same nation, same tier...  I have doubts.  I mean its possible but it seems... odd.

Still, I'd much rather see a Repulse thrown in if it IS a Battlecruiser test.  It is amusing to me that after the loooong drought of British capital ship releases following Warspite we are now at a point where people are getting annoyed by Royal Navy ships.

Not you Lert, just folks in general rolling their eyes at the RN.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29,641
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
22,715 posts
16,661 battles
2 minutes ago, Panzerlin said:

Still, I'd much rather see a Repulse thrown in if it IS a Battlecruiser test.

The problem with that is that adding Repulse would require a significant investment of time and resources (thus money) in building her in-game model. This I believe is why they choice Spooky of York for their test, since the modeling work has already been done and all that was needed was some re-shuffling of pre-existing AA assets and a new paint job.

But if we're talking about what we'd rather see, I'd much rather see Derfflinger any day of the week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
234 posts
12 battles

Don't forget this 1945 KGV hull was the first free XP ship before they swap over to Nelson.

 

I think the cost has just been copy/pasted over and this DoY is for the new operation only, like Anthony or Cyclone. dAA is there to help protect her from Rowen Island tier 9 bombers.

Salem might also be part of the attack on Rowen Island. :cap_like:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
658
[HELLS]
Members
2,434 posts
24,046 battles
14 minutes ago, Lert said:

Which is basically what Vanguard was, to begin with - a modernized KGV-based hull with 3x3 15" on it

Nope. 4 x 2 15-inch modified turrets that came off Glorious and Courageous when they were reconstructed as CVs capable of firing an 8crh shell to the same distance as Warspite in real life-8 barrels only. She has Mk37 USN directors for her secondaries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29,641
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
22,715 posts
16,661 battles
Just now, GrandAdmiral_2016 said:

Nope. 4 x 2 15-inch modified turrets

Yep, but AFAIK the hull, drive train and armor profile was based on the KGV class. I could be wrong, but that's what I've always heard and that's the assumption I was working under. You're right in pointing out 4x2 rather than 3x3 though, well caught.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
153
[-MOS-]
Alpha Tester
451 posts
4,052 battles

My first thought when I read that leaky rumor was, "Oh no! Could this be a sign that Nelson is being replaced on the tree?!" 
But yeah, remembering the new Tier 7 Operation and their wording for "Only available for the Tier VII ships."... makes me think they might be handing out ships for it like Dunkirk. Or they added one word too many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,500
[SALVO]
Members
23,795 posts
24,399 battles

If the goal is to try to  test a battlecruiser play style, why not just create a different type of premium ship strictly for testing purposes?  Put it in the tech tree, like other premiums, but offer it for  sale for credits.  BUT also stipulate up front that the ship is for testing only, and to expect changes.  It could behave like a premium with captain transfers, but not with any great credit earning potential like a normal premium.  Or maybe have it keep the good credit earning of a premium as an incentive to play it, while it exists. But again, make it clear that it's a test-bed ship only, and will be removed at some point and possibly changed as testing progresses.

Maybe make it a clone of the Hood, which actually was a battlecruiser. 

 

Anyways, just some food for thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29,641
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
22,715 posts
16,661 battles
Just now, Hatate_ said:

But yeah, remembering the new Tier 7 Operation and their wording for "Only available for the Tier VII ships."... makes me think they might be handing out ships for it like Dunkirk.

That is also very possible, but why then attach a free XP cost?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
153
[-MOS-]
Alpha Tester
451 posts
4,052 battles
Just now, Lert said:

That is also very possible, but why then attach a free XP cost?


It could be the byproduct of an older version of the ship. It could be really for free exp. We don't know yet, but there are tons of options still on the table.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,720
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
17,525 posts
12,810 battles

Why would someone play a battlecruiser when they could play a battleship, have the same firepower and armor, but a horrible set of consumables?  I'm not tracking the possible logic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,380
[SIM]
Members
4,339 posts
7,347 battles

Interesting perspective, Lert. I don’t have more to add to the conversation right now, other than acknowledging that it’s a compelling suggestion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
658
[HELLS]
Members
2,434 posts
24,046 battles
1 minute ago, Lert said:

Yep, but AFAIK the hull, drive train and armor profile was based on the KGV class. I could be wrong, but that's what I've always heard and that's the assumption I was working under. You're right in pointing out 4x2 rather than 3x3 though, well caught.

True. Pretty much the same hull lines. The only thing they modified on the hull was to add more sheer forward for better seaworthiness, and a transom stern for better stability and speed. A bit longer and beamier as well. Look at Conqueror's hull in the game and it is basically Vanguard expanded. The KGVs were wet ships with that low bow. I saw a video or film at some point, I forget where, showing Vanguard and Iowa in sea state 6 in Mid-Atlantic during an early 1950s NATO exercise. Iowa was rolling like a corvette and taking it green while Vanguard was taking it like the lady she was, one whole lot smoother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,597
Alpha Tester
6,135 posts
2,989 battles
29 minutes ago, Lert said:

 

Wolvie of G'mork (bonuspoints if you get that reference)

 

Never-Ending Story, right?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29,641
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
22,715 posts
16,661 battles
8 minutes ago, 1Sherman said:

Never-Ending Story, right?

Yarp.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,164
[RLGN]
Members
12,620 posts
22,441 battles
59 minutes ago, Lert said:

Dookie of York

 

1 hour ago, Lert said:

Suki-yaki of Stork

 

1 hour ago, Lert said:

Wolvie of G'mork

 

1 hour ago, Lert said:

Sushi of Pork

 

I kinda get the feeling you're slightly upset Lert...

...that, or the bug of amusement has bitten you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,364
Members
4,251 posts
16,405 battles
1 hour ago, Panzerlin said:

Two Free-XP ships in the same nation, same tier...  I have doubts.  I mean its possible but it seems... odd.

Still, I'd much rather see a Repulse thrown in if it IS a Battlecruiser test.  It is amusing to me that after the loooong drought of British capital ship releases following Warspite we are now at a point where people are getting annoyed by Royal Navy ships.

Not you Lert, just folks in general rolling their eyes at the RN.

Not just RN ships, but BATTLESHIPS! How some Heavy Cruisers? Like Exeter or Norfolk. Y'know WG, the Brits did have a lot of those CAs. Brit Cruisers, other than Belfast, that can use HE.

Edited by ReddNekk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29,641
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
22,715 posts
16,661 battles
15 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

...that, or the bug of amusement has bitten you!

Yeah I was surprised myself when hints of a sense of humor emerged. But after reading @LittleWhiteMouse's review of Kidd, well, something awoke in me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,649
[AHOY_]
Beta Testers
6,818 posts
4,361 battles

If they were testing battlecruiser-style concepts, then it should keep the Repair Party rather than have the short-duration burn timer, and instead have Warspite's style DCP, which is cruiser-based (both duration and CD). Then optionally cut down whatever equipped cruiser consumables they have by 1 or 2, such as AADF/Hydro/Radar/RoF Boost/Speed Boost/Smoke, where they are intended more of a last-resort consumable.

 

Regardless, I doubt it's a real battlecruiser/fast battleship concept test, and more of a last-minute recycling of a spare hull with a wild cruiser-esque setup as a prelude to superheavy cruiser/battlecruiser/fast battleship line concepts, and it just so happens to be a KGV. At least they can always buff it back with a normal Repair Party or some weaker variant if it proves too weak w/o it.

 

As far as Ashitaka goes, it's still a dreadnought hull, so it wouldn't work out as well for conceptual testing unless they made it a clone of the more modernized Amagi A or B instead with different gimmicks; such as 100mm DPs instead of 127mm DPs and 2 AADF Consumables instead of Kii's torpedoes or Amagi's vaunted TDS, as well as IJN cruiser-style DCP rather than IJN BB-style DCP (if there's a difference in cruiser DCPs the way there is between BB DCPs).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,247
Alpha Tester
4,156 posts
8,061 battles

Honestly if Ashitaka were being used to test a true battlecruiser setup and playstyle her appeal will increase a lot for me.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
769 posts
62 battles
5 minutes ago, Seraphil said:

Honestly if Ashitaka were being used to test a true battlecruiser setup and playstyle her appeal will increase a lot for me.

 

She could be testing the waters for an RN BC line. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,649
[AHOY_]
Beta Testers
6,818 posts
4,361 battles
1 minute ago, Sir_Davos_Seaworth said:

How many nicknames does one ship need? :Smile_teethhappy: 

 

I have no idea where they are going with this.... 

 

Can we just go with Dud of York in the event she falls flat out the gate?  And also because "Dead in the Waters of York" is too long.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29,641
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
22,715 posts
16,661 battles
7 minutes ago, Sir_Davos_Seaworth said:

How many nicknames does one ship need? :Smile_teethhappy:

Always at least one more.

  • Cool 1

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.

×