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

Why Gascogne as premium and Richelieu as tech tree ship?

76 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

22,453
[HINON]
Supertester
18,916 posts
12,446 battles

By now it's common knowledge through leaks and CC videos that WG is introducing Gascogne as premium and putting Richelieu in the tech tree. I have some thoughts about that.

Both have a 2x4 main gun arrangement, with Richelieu both turrets forward like Dunkerque and Gascogne one turret afore and one turret abaft the superstructure. Richelieu was actually built in steel and served, Gascogne was planned but never laid down. Interestingly, although Gascogne was a Richelieu class, WG got Rascogne's design right with the split turret layout - seems that even the French weren't exactly 100% happy with the all-guns-forward layout after all.

Richelieu presents a departure in turret layout and playstyle, all the French battleships before her and - if the leaks are anything to go by - Alsace after her have a more traditional turret layout. Gascogne is closer to this traditional turret layout than Richelieu.

We have WG on record as saying they don't like adding ships to a tech tree which represent a significant departure in play style, yet we also have many examples of exactly this happening.

So Richelieu is the historical one, I can see why WG would put that in the tech tree, yet that's also a good reason why WG would want to make her a premium.

Another thing to keep in mind is that Richelieu is the 'class lead', and Gascogne, despite differing so much in turret layout and playstyle, is a Richelieu class.

So why did WG put Richelieu in the tree and made Gascogne the premium? And what happened to Jean Bart, which is another Richelieu class that was actually built in steel and served, but following Richelieu's own all-turrets-afore layout? Why not put Richelieu in the tree and make Jean Bart the premium? Two historical ships, and WG has already proved they're not above introducing clones, differing mostly in gimmicks / consumables.

 

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
92
[KKM]
Members
668 posts
8,813 battles

A pretty good question.  I, personally, have given up trying to figure out why WG does anything they do.  It is almost as hard as trying to figure out my wife's thought process and trying to correlate it with logic.  Sometimes there is just no connection...lol  I just keep it to myself and  play the game.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240
[NUWES]
Members
1,640 posts
5,485 battles

I'm really hoping we see Jean Bart as a premium relatively soon. I'm far more interested in her than in Gascogne. I also really think the France should have been done with her turrets forward like an improved Richelieu as well. I don't like Gascogne's layout at all. 

Edited by Tzarevitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
419
[MIA-A]
[MIA-A]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,988 posts
7,651 battles

We don't need another Dunkirque premium. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240
[NUWES]
Members
1,640 posts
5,485 battles
1 minute ago, NeoRussia said:

We don't need another Dunkirque premium. 

??? Unless I missed something they haven't announced another Dunkerque premium.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,478
[AHOY_]
Beta Testers
6,419 posts
3,411 battles

Jean Bart is just a PITA to balance into the game. Most prefer her in her post-war configuration, but that's T10-T11 level AA. Sure, she could be put up into T9 with an artificially buffed 25~28s reload and better accuracy and nerf the secondary ranges to standard rather than the buffed extra-long range Richelieu/Alsace/France is given, but it still doesn't quite balance out the AA level.

There is the option of building her in a completed stock form, but with better gun performance to offset the lack of AA/secondaries, but stock Premiums have not really ever gone over well.

There's also the wild option of going with Jean Bart's initially planned BBCV configuration, which would be the most suitable Premium format she could take on if WG had already figured out how to make aviation cruisers/BBs work.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,509
[O7]
Members
4,921 posts
8,751 battles
2 minutes ago, NeoRussia said:

We don't need another Dunkirque premium. 

I think this is about all the answer required. Makes sense.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,509
[O7]
Members
4,921 posts
8,751 battles
Just now, Tzarevitch said:

??? Unless I missed something they haven't announced another Dunkerque premium.

What he means is, Dunk already has a 2 battery forward set up as a premium. Rich would be another 2 battery forward premium if it was made one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,453
[HINON]
Supertester
18,916 posts
12,446 battles
9 minutes ago, Pulicat said:

I think this is about all the answer required. Makes sense.

It's as good an answer as any other I suppose, but a subjective one. I for one wouldn't mind a 32 knot, 15" armed Dunkerque with 32mm bow plating and speed boost. Rather that than the semi-paper Gascogne, that was never built. That holds no interest for me.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
352
[D12]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
3,065 posts
8,840 battles
9 minutes ago, D_I_P_Scout said:

A pretty good question.  I, personally, have given up trying to figure out why WG does anything they do.  It is almost as hard as trying to figure out my wife's thought process and trying to correlate it with logic.  Sometimes there is just no connection...lol  I just keep it to myself and  play the game.  

Maybe your wife is smarter than you.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240
[NUWES]
Members
1,640 posts
5,485 battles
1 minute ago, Pulicat said:

What he means is, Dunk already has a 2 battery forward set up as a premium. Rich would be another 2 battery forward premium if it was made one.

I suspected that but that makes no sense. That's like saying we don't need Montana because New Mexico has the same battery layout. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
92
[KKM]
Members
668 posts
8,813 battles
Just now, Nachoo31 said:

Maybe your wife is smarter than you.

Oh without a doubt she is.  I am just an old dumb GRUNT.  LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
575
[PLPTV]
Members
1,457 posts
9,077 battles
25 minutes ago, Lert said:

By now it's common knowledge through leaks and CC videos that WG is introducing Gascogne as premium and putting Richelieu in the tech tree. I have some thoughts about that.

Both have a 2x4 main gun arrangement, with Richelieu both turrets forward like Dunkerque and Gascogne one turret afore and one turret abaft the superstructure. Richelieu was actually built in steel and served, Gascogne was planned but never laid down. Interestingly, although Gascogne was a Richelieu class, WG got Rascogne's design right with the split turret layout - seems that even the French weren't exactly 100% happy with the all-guns-forward layout after all.

Richelieu presents a departure in turret layout and playstyle, all the French battleships before her and - if the leaks are anything to go by - Alsace after her have a more traditional turret layout. Gascogne is closer to this traditional turret layout than Richelieu.

We have WG on record as saying they don't like adding ships to a tech tree which represent a significant departure in play style, yet we also have many examples of exactly this happening.

So Richelieu is the historical one, I can see why WG would put that in the tech tree, yet that's also a good reason why WG would want to make her a premium.

Another thing to keep in mind is that Richelieu is the 'class lead', and Gascogne, despite differing so much in turret layout and playstyle, is a Richelieu class.

So why did WG put Richelieu in the tree and made Gascogne the premium? And what happened to Jean Bart, which is another Richelieu class that was actually built in steel and served, but following Richelieu's own all-turrets-afore layout? Why not put Richelieu in the tree and make Jean Bart the premium? Two historical ships, and WG has already proved they're not above introducing clones, differing mostly in gimmicks / consumables.

 

One is historical vessel that people know of, the other some paper concept that hardly anyone has heard of. Whats there to understand? Its obvious that Gascogne would have been a premium.

Edited by Ulthwey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,453
[HINON]
Supertester
18,916 posts
12,446 battles
Just now, Ulthwey said:

One is historical vessel that people know of, the other some paper concept that hardly anyone has heard of. Whats there to understand?

WGs reasoning for placing them where they are, making Richelieu the tech tree ship and Gascogne the premium, when other more historically interesting options are available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
359
[DAY]
Members
1,154 posts
11,500 battles

i think its cuz richelieu is the class lead

fletcher class vs fletcher class black

des moines class vs des moines class salem

yamato class vs yamato class musashi

iowa class vs iowa class missouri

list goes on

i think this is the pattern WG is making (there are exceptions like scharn class invented gnei, but well thats an exception)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
419
[MIA-A]
[MIA-A]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,988 posts
7,651 battles
4 minutes ago, Tzarevitch said:

I suspected that but that makes no sense. That's like saying we don't need Montana because New Mexico has the same battery layout. 

 

I highly doubt Dunkirque and Richelieu are as different from each other as Montana and New Mexico, and those aren't premiums anyway. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,372
[-K-]
Members
5,073 posts
8,938 battles
14 minutes ago, Lert said:

It's as good an answer as any other I suppose, but a subjective one. I for one wouldn't mind a 32 knot, 15" armed Dunkerque with 32mm bow plating and speed boost. Rather that than the semi-paper Gascogne, that was never built. That holds no interest for me.

Can ma Dunk get speed boost too? :Smile_hiding:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
575
[PLPTV]
Members
1,457 posts
9,077 battles
9 minutes ago, Lert said:

WGs reasoning for placing them where they are, making Richelieu the tech tree ship and Gascogne the premium, when other more historically interesting options are available.

Richleu is as historical at tier 8 as it can get, a ship that existed in real life that has approximate specifications of a tier 8 ship in this game.

2 years ago, when this game came out, there were already posts that predicted that Richleu would be a tier 8 ship. There is no other ship that would be appropriate for this position in the tech tree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240
[NUWES]
Members
1,640 posts
5,485 battles
3 minutes ago, NeoRussia said:

I highly doubt Dunkirque and Richelieu are as different from each other as Montana and New Mexico, and those aren't premiums anyway. 

Premium has nothing to do with ship playstyle. I can use the same argument with Alabama and Missouri. They have the same gun layout and have far more in common with each other than Dunkerque does with any of the Richelieu class. Yet they play very differently. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,453
[HINON]
Supertester
18,916 posts
12,446 battles
3 minutes ago, Ulthwey said:

Richleu is as historical at tier 8 as it can get, a ship that existed in real life that has approximate specifications of a tier 8 ship in this game.

2 years ago, when this game came out, there were already posts that predicted that Richleu would be a tier 8 ship. There is no other ship that would be appropriate for this position in the tech tree.

Jean Bart.

"But Richelieu is the class lead"

And?

Still doesn't explain why Gascogne is the premium instead of Jean Bart. Or why they put the one with the completely unique playstyle (relative to the other ships in the tree) in the tree, despite having gone on record many times saying they don't like doing that, and putting the paper 15" on Gneisenau, to 'keep the progression going'. "Because that's how they've always done it" isn't much of an excuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240
[NUWES]
Members
1,640 posts
5,485 battles
2 minutes ago, Ulthwey said:

Richleu is as historical at tier 8 as it can get, a ship that existed in real life that has approximate specifications of a tier 8 ship in this game.

2 years ago, when this game came out, there were already posts that predicted that Richleu would be a tier 8 ship. There is no other ship that would be appropriate for this position in the tech tree.

It was also probably the best designed treaty battleship. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
575
[PLPTV]
Members
1,457 posts
9,077 battles
3 minutes ago, Lert said:

Jean Bart.

"But Richelieu is the class lead"

And?

Still doesn't explain why Gascogne is the premium instead of Jean Bart.

Its the same exact ship, do we not already have enough of that crap in game already? You want more Dukes of York in this game? Or maybe more clones like Alabama/Massachusetts??

At least Gascogne is a different design, the last thing we need in this game is more premium 1 for 1 replicas of tech tree ships.

Edited by Ulthwey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240
[NUWES]
Members
1,640 posts
5,485 battles
Just now, Lert said:

Jean Bart.

"But Richelieu is the class lead"

And?

Still doesn't explain why Gascogne is the premium instead of Jean Bart.

I suspect they chose her simply because she would have a different playstyle from her half-sisters. I can understand that, but I still want Jean Bart. She may have a lot of AA if the do her in her final form, but the Devs have already stated that they don't balance ships based on AA. I don't think the AA stop them from releasing her. I think they are just working on some way to make her play different from Richelieu without being OP. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,453
[HINON]
Supertester
18,916 posts
12,446 battles
1 minute ago, Ulthwey said:

At least Gascogne is a different design, the last thing we need in this game is more premium 1 for 1 replicas of tech tree ships.

Though I agree with the basic principle of what you said, I will still mention that the last time I said exactly the same thing, that became my most downvoted comment in recent history. So apparently that's not a commonly shared opinion on this forum.

I guess my main 'issue' is with the historically fascinating and thus financially exploitable design being made available for free, and the uninteresting, unhistorical semi-paper design being asked money for. Doesn't make much sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,052
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,669 posts
9,985 battles

It doesn't really make sense.

Until recently almost all premiums were commissioned as-was ships, I think Imperator Nikolai was the first not to see service, then WG threw out the Ohotnik and De Grasse, then more recently the Kii and Ashitaka were only in some stage of completion. However for every never-saw-service premium there are lots that did.

Gascogne has none of the good attributes of a premium, she's not an interesting departure from the line or from previous ships (being merely a hybrid Bismarck/Richelieu). She has zero interesting history, never being completed.

She makes no sense as a premium.

However, I don't want to question too much because I want a free tech-tree Richelieu and putting it behind a paywall and making Gascogne the tree ship would suck.

 

WG have been rather inconsistent on their 'doesn't fit' and 'but muh caliber progression' statements. Nelson's an outlier, yeah but the RN line still goes 15in-14in-15in. If Nelson's a problem then the PA-DD line going 127-130-120-127 must be a disaster...

 

My sneaking suspicion was that WG modelled Gascogne as a 'reserve battleship' in case there were any problems with a tree ship and to give them headroom for a mini-reshuffle (per Monarch being available for the RN). That and apparently a Dev was from the region and liked the name...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×