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

43 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
334 posts
14 battles

1.) From realistic point of view, even when this old design would be as heavily refitted as wg imagined, i simply cant believe she would ever able to reach 30 knots. We can compare her to Giulio Cesare which has the exact same dimensions and went through the most extended refit possible for that old hull - still italians were able to squeeze only 27 knots from it 28 at best. And those 115 000 horsepower wg gave to the Normandie, how can you fit it in her? Again italians were able to fit only 75 000 into Cesare and they even removed the middle turret for more space

2.) Dunkerque. What i really cant stand is that Normandie will be as fast as Dunkerque. This is simply wrong not just from realistic point of view but from balance point as well. Now Dunkerque is straight up worse.

 

So, i think Normadie's speed should be reduced at least by 2 knots. That still would be enough for the competition and she still will be the second fastest BB on the tier with Dunkerque being the fastest - as it should be.

 

EDIT: i had no idea what WG did with the Normandie (read below). she is literally screwed beyond repair. throw her away

Edited by puxflacet
  • Cool 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
813
[_ARP_]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
3,737 posts
3,186 battles

Well, the fastest BBs in Tier 6 right now are: 

Dunkirk 

Mutsu 

Normandie 

Not in this order, but they are there. 

~Hunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
813
[SPTR]
Members
25,640 posts
10,824 battles

a WWI chubby armored Dreadnought design going roughly faster than a not so armored interwar slender fast battleship thats over 20 years newer that was designed to chase down german cruisers.

Something is definitely not right here.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
650
[-K-]
[-K-]
Supertester, In AlfaTesters
2,049 posts
9,289 battles

This is more of an arcade game not a Sim. Many things are done for balance purposes that are not always true to what the ships could do.  

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,426
[5BS]
Members
4,493 posts
2 minutes ago, Fodder4U said:

This is more of an arcade game not a Sim. Many things are done for balance purposes that are not always true to what the ships could do.  

Okay, I'll lean in on this, what's the balance purpose of a 29 knot, 12 gunned T6 BB?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,373
[-K-]
Members
5,075 posts
8,942 battles
7 minutes ago, Fodder4U said:

This is more of an arcade game not a Sim. Many things are done for balance purposes that are not always true to what the ships could do.  

Yep.  She's essentially a paper ship, so they can tweak her how they want to try and give her a unique trait. 

In this case, they felt that extra speed would be the thing to set her apart from the rest of her T6 counterparts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,779 posts
5,641 battles

More evidence WG degrading this game. Why make the ship look realistic, only to make the stat's a fantasy. They did it to world of tanks, every tank runs around the map like a race car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
2,589 posts
8,292 battles

WG said they crammed Dunkek's propulsion system into her. That, along with changing the hulk form, *may* have been enough to get that speed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
139 posts
1,845 battles

s2su6XC.jpg

This is like the 5th thread we've had claiming "muh realism" in regards to the French BB speeds. Can we just chill out and see how the increased speed affect BB gameplay styles?

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
163
[MEIST]
Members
790 posts
2,940 battles
3 hours ago, Rolkatsuki said:

a WWI chubby armored Dreadnought design going roughly faster than a not so armored interwar slender fast battleship thats over 20 years newer that was designed to chase down german cruisers.

Something is definitely not right here.

Don't fat shame the Normandie. :Smile_teethhappy:  

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
163
[MEIST]
Members
790 posts
2,940 battles
4 minutes ago, Pyromaniac_Rasputin said:

This is like the 5th thread we've had claiming "muh realism" in regards to the French BB speeds. Can we just chill out and see how the increased speed affect BB gameplay styles?

I agree, maybe people will play her more like a cruiser and not sit in the back. May be able to flank and get out of there if it gets to hot. People keep forgetting this is not a sim game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
334 posts
14 battles
20 minutes ago, Pyromaniac_Rasputin said:

s2su6XC.jpg

This is like the 5th thread we've had claiming "muh realism" in regards to the French BB speeds. Can we just chill out and see how the increased speed affect BB gameplay styles?

If you can read, i already did with comparing her to dunkerque. Realistic or not there should be some trade off and Normandie currently doesnt have any.

Edited by puxflacet
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
139 posts
1,845 battles
57 minutes ago, puxflacet said:

If you can read, i already did with comparing her to dunkerque. Realistic or not there should be some trade off and Normandie currently doesnt have any.

If you can read what you write, you are complaining about the speeds the Normandie can reach in game and your only argument is speed. There have been several topics on this already and this factor will not be balanced on "muh realism" (your first point). In regards to your second point, the most obvious trade off is gun handling. The Dunkerque's gun rotate faster (36s vs 45s), her AP rounds have significantly higher velocities (870 vs 780 m/s), her rifles load slightly faster (28s vs 30s), her sigma is slightly better (1.7 vs 1.6), her turret layout is objectively better (guns should be on target more often without swinging her self side to side to unmask her mid and aft turrets). Two negatives the dunkerque has with guns is her HE though still fast is slower than Normandies (885 vs 921 m/s), and dunkerque has 8 rifles vs 12. Dunkerque also has 4300 more health.

Even though both ships will have roughly the same maneuverability the gun handling is what is going to seperate them. But remember the Normandie is a paper ship and can be tuned down if she overpreforms but I am excited to see how the meta changes when these fast battleships start being played.

 

Edit: spelling and grammar are hard on a phone.

Edited by Pyromaniac_Rasputin
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
134
[CAPGO]
Members
513 posts
3,262 battles

If Frenches had to get fantasy stats for balancing purposes, why early to mid USN BBs are stuck at 21 knots?

I am totally fine if WG wants to stick to fantasy stats just for balancing purposes..but if you are going to do so.. you should really DO SO.

Otherwise, I prefer to see all ships be as much as historical.

Make it fair or make it real.. WG you have to choose one. you CANNOT mix up.

Edited by 0806sung

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
284
[BLUMR]
Members
2,048 posts
6,943 battles
7 minutes ago, 0806sung said:

If Frenches had to get fantasy stats for balancing purposes, why early to mid USN BBs are stuck at 21 knots?

I am totally fine if WG wants to stick to fantasy stats just for balancing purposes..but if you are going to do so.. you should really DO SO.

Otherwise, I prefer to see all ships be as much as historical.

Make it fair or make it real.. WG you have choose one. you CANNOT mix up.

Sigh first of all. Those are heavily armed dreadnoughts with the all or nothing attitude.

however when you look at the french line, they are less armoured and overall lighter ship (if i correct) but  new mexico didnt have powerful porpulsion at all i think it was aeound 72,000? And with a ship her size thats way too small. Also you have to account speed isnt always the best. More speed = worse handling

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,360 posts
3,915 battles
7 hours ago, puxflacet said:

1.) From realistic point of view, even when this old design would be as heavily refitted as wg imagined, i simply cant believe she would ever able to reach 30 knots. We can compare her to Giulio Cesare which has the exact same dimensions and went through the most extended refit possible for that old hull - still italians were able to squeeze only 27 knots from it 28 at best. And those 115 000 horsepower wg gave to the Normandie, how can you fit it in her? Again italians were able to fit only 75 000 into Cesare and they even removed the middle turret for more space

2.) Dunkerque. What i really cant stand is that Normandie will be as fast as Dunkerque. This is simply wrong not just from realistic point of view but from balance point as well. Now Dunkerque is straight up worse.

 

So, i think Normadie's speed should be reduced at least by 2 knots. That still would be enough for the competition and she still will be the second fastest BB on the tier with Dunkerque being the fastest - as it should be.

It's not the real deal. The moment they started talking about the hull being extended in the middle of the ship, it stopped being the circa 1910 Normandie. You just can't do that with battleships. Modern cruise ships and merchantmen? Yes - because the hullform is a standard shape almost the entire length of the vessels. 1900-1950s era capital ships? Absolutely not - because the hullform changes over the length of the vessel. 'Swapping in' a few sections would result in a skewed profile. Allow me to demonstrate with a visual (added sections are in red):

ID3qFpa.png

And this, of course, says nothing of the bowing/cambering of the hull or other shape aside from a flat profile (it gets ludicrously complex once you start adding in shapes like torpedo bulges and outward flare near the deck level) - but it gives you an idea as to why the proposed Wargaming alterations would be TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY IMPOSSIBLE. When the Caio Duilios and Conte di Cavours were expanded, Italy tacked new bows onto the front - this is doable. Midsection alterations are not. NOTE THE RADICAL HULLFORM OF EVEN THE MIDSECTION OF THIS AMERICAN BB - THIS IS NOT A BOX. NOWHERE IS IT SHAPED LIKE A BOX:

4a25635a.jpg

Anyone looking for further proof that the people at this company in charge of making decisions regarding naval architecture are approaching it with a enormously flawed perspective need look no further than the "we added some sections to the middle" explanation on Normandie's size upgrade. 

Edited by Cruiser_Fiume
  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
134
[CAPGO]
Members
513 posts
3,262 battles
8 minutes ago, RiverTheIdiot said:

Sigh first of all. Those are heavily armed dreadnoughts with the all or nothing attitude.

however when you look at the french line, they are less armoured and overall lighter ship (if i correct) but  new mexico didnt have powerful porpulsion at all i think it was aeound 72,000? And with a ship her size thats way too small. Also you have to account speed isnt always the best. More speed = worse handling

So you prefer ahistorical speed for French ships because they are under-armored..

your point being is? I said I am okay that Frenches are getting fantasy stats, but early to mid USN BBs have been power-creeped by so many ships that they need some help too.

are you against the idea of early USN BB buff to match those fantasy ships or what?

I don't get it.

BTW, dreadnoughts are not built under all or nothing attitude.. that's late USN design.

and those enormous propulsions don't fit Frenches either, their excuse is.. they lengthened the ship as an imagined refit A.K.A fantasy ship. 

So why USN BBs have to be stuck at 21 knots?

Edited by 0806sung

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
284
[BLUMR]
Members
2,048 posts
6,943 battles
1 minute ago, 0806sung said:

So you prefer ahistorical speed for French ships because they are under-armored..

your point being is? I said I am okay that Frenches are getting fantasy stats, but early to mid USN BBs have been power-creeped by so many ships that they need some help too.

are you against the idea of early USN BB buff to match those fantasy ships or what?

I don't get it

No i was saying it was a trade off.  USN ship where known for sailing slow. Up till the late 1930's to early 1940's they changed that with the outbreak of world war two. Besides give new york for instance didnt even have turbines yet in her engines.  Thats how outdated the american propulsion is. South carolina IRL probably wouldnt even get to achive her 18knts speed. Trust me these early ships had flaws in them. And flaws like that usually get represented in the game. Such as hull design for aerodynamic flow, displacement,  propulsion, screws, etc seeing mid tier USN bb's go more then 26ish knts would be like saying the khaba should go 60 lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
134
[CAPGO]
Members
513 posts
3,262 battles
14 minutes ago, RiverTheIdiot said:

No i was saying it was a trade off.  USN ship where known for sailing slow. Up till the late 1930's to early 1940's they changed that with the outbreak of world war two. Besides give new york for instance didnt even have turbines yet in her engines.  Thats how outdated the american propulsion is. South carolina IRL probably wouldnt even get to achive her 18knts speed. Trust me these early ships had flaws in them. And flaws like that usually get represented in the game. Such as hull design for aerodynamic flow, displacement,  propulsion, screws, etc seeing mid tier USN bb's go more then 26ish knts would be like saying the khaba should go 60 lol

"USN ship where knwon for sailing slow." So you prefer historical ships in game.

Then Normandie doesn't deserve 30 knots.

What's it that you don't get?

I said, make it fair, or make it real.

I'm fine either way, just don't mix up.

 

Are you denying the fact that early USN BBs are under-performing compared to the couterparts? WG's only reason for not buffing early USN BBs were ..that they were sticking to real-life stats. And now look at French BBs.. It raises a lot of questions.

Edited by 0806sung

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
421
[MIA-A]
[MIA-A]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,989 posts
7,652 battles

What I don't get is why France has such terrible horsepower in comparison. The design of France seems to be greatly flawed in many aspects, why would a ship built before ww2 outdo it in speed? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,058
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,670 posts
9,998 battles
3 hours ago, _RC1138 said:

Okay, I'll lean in on this, what's the balance purpose of a 29 knot, 12 gunned T6 BB?

She's overtiered.

Compared to the Fuso/New Mexico she has a far less potent main battery, and in the case of Fuso less accurate and slower reloading. Normandie's armor is nothing to write home about, especially compared to New Mexico.

Without a speed leg up (and her turning radius being equal to NM on a much faster ship is suspect too) she couldn't compete. If you put her as a 22kt ship down at T5 she'd have a 2-gun advantage over say Iron Duke and New York, but less punchy guns and would probably balance out fairly well. Ditto Bretagne down to T4.

WG have seemed to want to go with a speed flavor on fairly dubious grounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
421
[MIA-A]
[MIA-A]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,989 posts
7,652 battles
10 minutes ago, mofton said:

She's overtiered.

Compared to the Fuso/New Mexico she has a far less potent main battery, and in the case of Fuso less accurate and slower reloading. Normandie's armor is nothing to write home about, especially compared to New Mexico.

Without a speed leg up (and her turning radius being equal to NM on a much faster ship is suspect too) she couldn't compete. If you put her as a 22kt ship down at T5 she'd have a 2-gun advantage over say Iron Duke and New York, but less punchy guns and would probably balance out fairly well. Ditto Bretagne down to T4.

WG have seemed to want to go with a speed flavor on fairly dubious grounds.

There is no way a ship with Normandie's hp pool and torpedo protection would stand up in T7, if you nerfed her to T5 the firepower would be too strong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,058
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,670 posts
9,998 battles
3 minutes ago, NeoRussia said:

There is no way a ship with Normandie's hp pool and torpedo protection would stand up in T7, if you nerfed her to T5 the firepower would be too strong. 

T7?

At T5 and with sensible speed Normandie would have 12x 340mm guns with German dispersion, you could ditch the interwar HE shells. How good her turret angles are I'm not sure. The armor's not brilliant. That puts her up against Iron Duke and New York which are far punchier, and a punchier, faster Kongo, and a 10-gun punchier, more accurate and faster GC.

Seems possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
813
[_ARP_]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
3,737 posts
3,186 battles
27 minutes ago, 0806sung said:

"USN ship where knwon for sailing slow." So you prefer historical ships in game.

Then Normandie doesn't deserve 30 knots.

What's it that you don't get?

I said, make it fair, or make it real.

I'm fine either way, just don't mix up.

You want to see the forums get set on fire? Because that's how you do it. The USN BBs existed, they were built, and they served a career. How would people feel if Texas started doing 26kts when the most she could muster was 21kts? New Mexico and Lolorado going 24kts? Thats laughable at best. USN mid tiers do not need a speed increase, what they need are better main battery ranges to compensate for their slow speed. New York being able to reach out to 19km is good enough for her to be able to make things work. 

The Difference my friend, is that the USN BBs are historical, and added in with their historical stats. Normandie and Lyon are not, not even their refits. Hell, Lyon has two separate designs, the one we have in game, and one where the #2 turret super-fires over the #1 turret in a very traditional layout 

As such, the only French BBs in game that existed, (Not certain about Courbet or the TIer 3/Tier 5.) are Dunkirk and Richelieu. Yup, the only ones. And Richie has speed boost. 

In otherwords, WG can do as they please with the stats of the ships in the game due to their existence as paper-ships. WG DOES NOT have that freedom with ships that physically existed. The only thing they can do is have them work in perfect working condition. Which is why we can steam all game at our max speeds whereas in real life we'd be risking burning out or blowing up the power-plants of the ships. 

~Hunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
134
[CAPGO]
Members
513 posts
3,262 battles
3 minutes ago, Hunter_Steel said:

You want to see the forums get set on fire? Because that's how you do it. The USN BBs existed, they were built, and they served a career. How would people feel if Texas started doing 26kts when the most she could muster was 21kts? New Mexico and Lolorado going 24kts? Thats laughable at best. USN mid tiers do not need a speed increase, what they need are better main battery ranges to compensate for their slow speed. New York being able to reach out to 19km is good enough for her to be able to make things work. 

The Difference my friend, is that the USN BBs are historical, and added in with their historical stats. Normandie and Lyon are not, not even their refits. Hell, Lyon has two separate designs, the one we have in game, and one where the #2 turret super-fires over the #1 turret in a very traditional layout 

As such, the only French BBs in game that existed, (Not certain about Courbet or the TIer 3/Tier 5.) are Dunkirk and Richelieu. Yup, the only ones. And Richie has speed boost. 

In otherwords, WG can do as they please with the stats of the ships in the game due to their existence as paper-ships. WG DOES NOT have that freedom with ships that physically existed. The only thing they can do is have them work in perfect working condition. Which is why we can steam all game at our max speeds whereas in real life we'd be risking burning out or blowing up the power-plants of the ships. 

~Hunter

Thanks for the post. 

I know it's hard for WG to make it right for everyone.

I guess my complaint was that WG is starting to deviate too much from history or even realistic designs for paper ships.

Paper ships are not laid down but a lot of them were finished design that COULD HAVE been built.

I know for sure 30 knots for Normandie is PHYSICALLY impossible, yet they implement it. And we know Wyoming, New York is struggling with power-creep and so is Colorado too

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.

×