Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Aristotle83

Historical accuracy complaint thread

45 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
626 posts
1,630 battles

A thread where people complain about various things they think aren't historically accurate that should be. This isn't for any nitpicking, this is for huge deviations from real life. You know like making battlecruisers actual cruisers, making paper premiums, giving us a paper or fake ships in lieu of a real one(Monarch's spot should have been Vanguard's!). Let it all out! 

Be respectful(but funny if possible, I have a boring life I like being entertained) that way if someone from WG reads it, they will take your thoughts into serious consideration or at least reflect on them.

I have a lot of things I want to complain about, but I won't because I just want to see what grinds everyone else's boilers 

Edited by Aristotle83
  • Cool 1
  • Bad 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,001 posts
60 battles

What's the point having this? It has been all over the place for over 5 years. It's petty.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
[WOLF2]
Members
2,992 posts
5,204 battles
Just now, Xero_Snake said:

What's the point having this? It has been all over the place for over 5 years. It's petty.

Petty is one of the two p's that the internet is for.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,824
[ARRGG]
[ARRGG]
Members
5,770 posts

The only thing "Historical" In this game is the remarkable reference to Actual Historical References.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
626 posts
1,630 battles
7 minutes ago, Xero_Snake said:

What's the point having this? It has been all over the place for over 5 years. It's petty.

Well got to see the complaints to find out! 

 

That being said outside of the last few US BB's the Texas and Mikasa there are absolutely no historical BB's left, not sure about CV's, cruisers(think there's like 1 WWI, not sure how many WWII) and DD's though I know at least a few WWII era CV's are still hanging around and we'll never get to see them fight in real life. WOWS is the closest thing we'll get to see these ships, not just in color but in action, many of which no longer physically exist. Is this being done right one of the most pressing issues facing the world? No, but it's not the most meaningless thing people have posted about on the internet either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
3,334 posts
3,779 battles
1 minute ago, Aristotle83 said:

Well got to see the complaints to find out! 

 

That being said outside of the last few US BB's the Texas and Mikasa there are absolutely no historical BB's left, not sure about CV's, cruisers(think there's like 1 WWI, not sure how many WWII) and DD's though I know at least a few WWII era CV's are still hanging around and we'll never get to see them fight in real life. WOWS is the closest thing we'll get to see these ships, not just in color but in action, many of which no longer physically exist. Is this being done right one of the most pressing issues facing the world? No, but it's not the most meaningless thing people have posted about on the internet either. 

*rolls around laughing on floor*. 

 

There are dozens of historical ships left to make. Excluding all the MN BB's were getting, there's the various minor-power battleships(Minas Gerias, for example), the whole host of RN and KM battlecruisers, the various Italian battleships(and for that matter the entire Italian navy, for the most part), numerous USN DD types left absent, French destroyers, British destroyers, much of the IJN CV force, etc, etc, etc. You make a thread about historical accuracy- and then you post something like this.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
223
[RIPQP]
Members
435 posts
12,284 battles

My biggest historical complaint about this game is the lack of submarines.

Edited by grumpymunky
  • Cool 1
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,743 posts
5,464 battles
4 minutes ago, Aetreus said:

*rolls around laughing on floor*. 

 

There are dozens of historical ships left to make. Excluding all the MN BB's were getting, there's the various minor-power battleships(Minas Gerias, for example), the whole host of RN and KM battlecruisers, the various Italian battleships(and for that matter the entire Italian navy, for the most part), numerous USN DD types left absent, French destroyers, British destroyers, much of the IJN CV force, etc, etc, etc. You make a thread about historical accuracy- and then you post something like this.

He's talking about ships that still exist in real life as museums now, not what's left to add to the game.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,001 posts
60 battles
Just now, grumpymunky said:

My biggest historical complaint about this game is the lack of submarines.

Of which will never gonna happen... :Smile_smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
3,334 posts
3,779 battles
Just now, GhostSwordsman said:

He's talking about ships that still exist in real life as museums now, not what's left to add to the game.

I guess I didn't pick up on that because this isn't a historical discussion thread. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
365
[HELLS]
Members
1,688 posts
15,274 battles

Those of us who are old enough to have actually seen some of these ships (in my case RN, RCN and USN WW II-vintage ships-some in their original states-yes I am that old) can attest to the accuracy of many of the real ship models in the game. As a 3D modeller myself I don't work up a sweat about imaginary paper ships, although I do not favor them. They are part of the game, this is an arcade game played on line by a bunch of avid gamers for fun, and that's that! Why beef about it? It is what it is....

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,748 posts
6,245 battles

Ghostdog say load guns, pour on the steam, shoot at anything red. Doesn't matter whether it's a pre-Viking era row boat, some mythical green shimmering phantasmic hulk from the nether world, Poseidon's flag ship or a Klingon Bird of Prey. (Only got one hit on the Bird of Prey).

th?id=OIP.RtGeszUb-yjGTAhAJ1YJnwD0D_&pid

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
1,940 posts
2 hours ago, GrandAdmiral_2016 said:

Those of us who are old enough to have actually seen some of these ships (in my case RN, RCN and USN WW II-vintage ships-some in their original states-yes I am that old) can attest to the accuracy of many of the real ship models in the game. As a 3D modeller myself I don't work up a sweat about imaginary paper ships, although I do not favor them. They are part of the game, this is an arcade game played on line by a bunch of avid gamers for fun, and that's that! Why beef about it? It is what it is....

I don't mind paper/fake ships either. But when WG puts fictional refits on real historical ships like Kaiser, Konig, Bayern and Iron Duke, that's when they go too far. I don't even know why the bother with hypothetical modernizations when they're merely cosmetic and do not affect a ship's in-game performance. Bayern's stock hull is historical, yet upgrading her propulsion to 25 knots does not alter her appearance.

I know it's just a game. Still that didn't stop WG from conjuring up hypothetical refits and modernizations. It would've saved them alot of modelling time if they had stuck to the ships' historical designs while buffing speeds and other performance stats.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
417
[CAST]
Members
1,398 posts
5,815 battles

I dislike the fact that I have never seen a single dolphin in this game, even though the ocean is full of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,586
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,298 battles
10 hours ago, Wolcott said:

I don't mind paper/fake ships either. But when WG puts fictional refits on real historical ships like Kaiser, Konig, Bayern and Iron Duke, that's when they go too far. I don't even know why the bother with hypothetical modernizations when they're merely cosmetic and do not affect a ship's in-game performance. Bayern's stock hull is historical, yet upgrading her propulsion to 25 knots does not alter her appearance.

I know it's just a game. Still that didn't stop WG from conjuring up hypothetical refits and modernizations. It would've saved them alot of modelling time if they had stuck to the ships' historical designs while buffing speeds and other performance stats.

Face Palm.

If they didn't add those fictional refits, some ships would be stuck in their WW1 condition and  be completely unviable against WW2 era ships.  For starters, many WW1 era BBs couldn't elevate their guns sufficiently to reach out to their WW2 era ranges.  Or have anything close to respectable AA.  Or many other things.

 

Edit: Love how some people will downvote a post but won't post a reply to attempt to refute something they disagree with.   They can down vote this post all they want, but it doesn't change the facts that leaving a WW1 era BB in its original WW1 state and allowing it to face true WW2 era tier 8 BBs would be beyond ridiculous!  

 

Edited by Crucis
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,586
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,298 battles
3 hours ago, grumpymunky said:

My biggest historical complaint about this game is the lack of submarines.

Submarines didn't fight in fleet actions.  So including them would have been just as inaccurate as including corvettes and frigates and so on that were only meant for escorting convoys, not fleet action.

 

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,586
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,298 battles
3 hours ago, Aristotle83 said:

A thread where people complain about various things they think aren't historically accurate that should be. This isn't for any nitpicking, this is for huge deviations from real life. You know like making battlecruisers actual cruisers, making paper premiums, giving us a paper or fake ships in lieu of a real one(Monarch's spot should have been Vanguard's!). Let it all out! 

Be respectful(but funny if possible, I have a boring life I like being entertained) that way if someone from WG reads it, they will take your thoughts into serious consideration or at least reflect on them.

I have a lot of things I want to complain about, but I won't because I just want to see what grinds everyone else's boilers 

Frankly, I think that it's rather questionable whether the Vanguard is tier 8 material without some extreme fictionalization.  

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,748 posts
6,245 battles
1 hour ago, Harv72b said:

I dislike the fact that I have never seen a single dolphin in this game, even though the ocean is full of them

I caught it even if no one else did

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,258
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,783 posts
14,864 battles
4 hours ago, Aristotle83 said:

This isn't for any nitpicking, this is for huge deviations from real life.

One man's nitpick is another man's huge deviation.

4 hours ago, awiggin said:

Welcome to the.....

  Hide contents

ep32QFW.jpg

 

Welcome to the Jungle ... We've got fun and games!

4 hours ago, Aetreus said:

There are dozens of historical ships left to make. Excluding all the MN BB's were getting, there's the various minor-power battleships(Minas Gerias, for example), the whole host of RN and KM battlecruisers, the various Italian battleships(and for that matter the entire Italian navy, for the most part), numerous USN DD types left absent, French destroyers, British destroyers, much of the IJN CV force, etc, etc, etc. You make a thread about historical accuracy- and then you post something like this.

He's talking about actually existing ships in the real world (and screwed that up because he forgot all the Iowa class BB's floating around.) And never forget all those wonderful Russian ships which turn up on Vodka soaked napkins which have been "secretly stored away" for all these many years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
626 posts
1,630 battles
23 minutes ago, Umikami said:

One man's nitpick is another man's huge deviation.

Welcome to the Jungle ... We've got fun and games!

He's talking about actually existing ships in the real world (and screwed that up because he forgot all the Iowa class BB's floating around.) And never forget all those wonderful Russian ships which turn up on Vodka soaked napkins which have been "secretly stored away" for all these many years.

"last few US BB's". What ships do you think this was a reference to? Didn't name the Iowa class because I knew there was a handful of museum ships that precede the Iowa class. Just checked and you've got the Massachusetts, and Alabama from the South Dakota class and the North Carolina. That's 9 total historical battleships from the pre dreadnought era onwards and 8 of them are American BB's that to be honest were largely saved(except the Missouri which is US's Nelson) because of state attachment to the vessels that bear their name.

In terms of cruisers despite their being so many more of them it's worse, from pre 1950 there are 2 British cruisers, 3 US cruisers, 1 Russian cruiser and 1 Greek cruiser. Aside from Belfast it seems these actually are all future good premium material. 

In terms of CV's 4 of the 24 ship Essex class is preserved as is Midway and not one ship from the famous carrier battles. I do not believe a single period Japanese aircraft carrier survives nor British. 

 

 

Edited by Aristotle83

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
626 posts
1,630 battles
52 minutes ago, Ghostdog1355 said:

I caught it even if no one else did

This should have been the French T10 BB's name. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
95
[LRM3]
[LRM3]
Members
390 posts
5,406 battles

If we are talking historical accuracy, I would like to mention the range and accuracy of the Roma’s main battery. Although I know it won’t change, that’s what really grinds my gears. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,586
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,298 battles
8 hours ago, Aristotle83 said:

"last few US BB's". What ships do you think this was a reference to? Didn't name the Iowa class because I knew there was a handful of museum ships that precede the Iowa class. Just checked and you've got the Massachusetts, and Alabama from the South Dakota class and the North Carolina. That's 9 total historical battleships from the pre dreadnought era onwards and 8 of them are American BB's that to be honest were largely saved(except the Missouri which is US's Nelson) because of state attachment to the vessels that bear their name.

In terms of cruisers despite their being so many more of them it's worse, from pre 1950 there are 2 British cruisers, 3 US cruisers, 1 Russian cruiser and 1 Greek cruiser. Aside from Belfast it seems these actually are all future good premium material. 

In terms of CV's 4 of the 24 ship Essex class is preserved as is Midway and not one ship from the famous carrier battles. I do not believe a single period Japanese aircraft carrier survives nor British. 

 

 

Well, duh, not a single IJN CV survives, except on the bottom of the Pacific.  And the Brits were extremely desperate for steel after WW2, which is a big reason (perhaps the #1 reason) they scrapped so much of their navy.  Hard to justify keeping museum ships around when you desperately need the steel for more practical reasons.    The US, OTOH, had no lack of steel, and so could afford to turn ships into museum ships or transfer them into massive reserve fleets.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×