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

Should the USS Indiana BB-58 be added into the game?

Should Wargaming bring Indiana into the game?  

53 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Wargaming bring USS Indiana into the game when they do the US Battleship split?

    • Yes
      18
    • No
      35

57 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

670
[OSO]
Members
3,788 posts

The namesake: State of Indiana
Builder: Newport News Shipbuilding

Laid down: 20 November 1939

Launched: 21 November 1941

Commissioned: 30 April 1942

Decommissioned: 11 September 1947

Struck: 1 June 1962

Honors and awards:  9 Battle Stars

 

Class Type- South Dakota- class battleship


Displacement 37,9701 long tons (38,580t (standard)

Length: 680 feet (210 m) 

Beam 108 feet 2 inches (32.97m)

Draft 29.3 F (8.9 m)

Installed Power:  130,000 shp (97,000 kW) Eight Babcock &Wilcox boilers

Propulsion:  Four-shaft General Electric Steam Turbines

Speed 27.5 Knots 

Range: 15,000 nmi

Armerment 9 X 16 inch (41 0mm) 45 calibur Mark 6 guns

                   20 X 5inch (130 mm) 38 caliber DP guns

                     6 X quad 40 mm (1.6 in)Bofors guns

                   16 X 20 mm (0.79 in) Oerlikon cannons

Armor:  Belt 12.2 in ( 310 mm)

              Deck: 6 in (152mm)

             Turrets: 18 in (46 cm)

             Barbetts 17.3 in (440 mm)

            Conning tower: 16 in (410 mm)

Aircraft carried: 3 X Kingfisher floatplanes

Aviation Facilities 2 X catapults 

 

 Personally I enjoy the battleship lines.  I do not know when Wargaming is going to to the split off with the battleship lines.  I know the pre dreadnoughts could be one split.  Then have all of the newer ships be the secondary split.  But there are just so many ships it's not even funny.  But I for one would like to see this ship in game.

USS_Indiana_(BB-58)_-_80-G-222923.jpg

Edited by SuperSpud1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
438
Members
1,291 posts
9,884 battles

Why do we need this ship in the game? Other than the name how is it different from Alabama and Massachusetts? Are you asking for this ship just because of its name? Why don't you instead ask for a feature to change a ship's name?

Edited by Rouxi
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,877
[NSF]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,300 posts
9,116 battles

Probably couldn’t have picked more of a “literally who” battleship of the entire Second World War.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31,002
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
23,331 posts
17,525 battles

Yes, that's what we need. A third clone of a ship already in the game once, with a second clone about to be released.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,043 posts
10,248 battles

As the Tier VIII tech tree ship of a second (or split-off, which I doubt) battleship line, absolutely. South Dakota only had eight twin 5"/38 mounts, due to her outfitting as a flagship, so while the ship might bear her name, the in-game model will in fact be that of Indiana. WG does this all the time, apparently; the Iowa in-game is in reality the Wisconsin, and the New York in the game is actually Texas (the former had a different bridge and foremast structure). Other ships from other nations have similar distortions, and that is understandable given how they tend to balance things. That's why, despite the powercreep, they keep insisting that the top hull for Colorado is "perfectly fine" when she should at least be Maryland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
828 posts
6,368 battles
10 minutes ago, Lert said:

Yes, that's what we need. A third clone of a ship already in the game once, with a second clone about to be released.

WGing apparently think so with five tier 10 Soviet medium tanks that are essentially the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
546
[TNP66]
Beta Testers
1,896 posts
4,583 battles

It could happen for all we know and if we will have to make up a name for this earlier South Dakota class proposal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota-class_battleship_(1920)

I would pay attention to the announcement of the USS Massachusettes not being released anytime soon. I am always open to new ships it's just that sometimes you find old class proposals that would be something different while bearing the same name.Imagine a New Mexico with 406 caliber guns and then you get the idea.

http://steelnavy.com/IHPSouthDakota.htm

http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/50.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,566
[REVY]
Members
6,452 posts
5,168 battles
13 minutes ago, Lert said:

Yes, that's what we need. A third clone of a ship already in the game once, with a second clone about to be released.

It would be wonderful if every named ship in WWII and WWI made it into the game eventually, but we don't need them all at once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,089
[KNMSU]
Members
7,086 posts
7,668 battles

No.

1) Wasn't preserved.

2) Isn't the name-ship in the line (which means we should expect South Dakota in a future second US BB tree).

3) Comes from a low-population state.

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31,002
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
23,331 posts
17,525 battles
Just now, Sventex said:

It would be wonderful if every named ship in WWII and WWI made it into the game eventually

Ooo! Yes! I can't wait until I have to learn 175 names to be able to recognize all the @#$%@#$ Fletchers that ever served ....

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,566
[REVY]
Members
6,452 posts
5,168 battles
1 minute ago, Lert said:

Ooo! Yes! I can't wait until I have to learn 175 names to be able to recognize all the @#$%@#$ Fletchers that ever served ....

LOL, you have a point about the DDs and Cruisers.  

Edited by Sventex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,202
[HINON]
Members
12,804 posts
8 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_Lutzow said:

3) Comes from a low-population state.

What does a state's population have to do with including a ship in the game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,921
[ARS]
Beta Testers
4,348 posts
4,721 battles
13 minutes ago, RipNuN2 said:

What does a state's population have to do with including a ship in the game?

Likely number of sales due to "Its my state's name ship".  California, Texas =  high populations, Indiana = low population.

Obviously there are other considerations, but USS Indiana doesn't really hit those either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
594 posts
4,461 battles
27 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_Lutzow said:

No.

1) Wasn't preserved.

2) Isn't the name-ship in the line (which means we should expect South Dakota in a future second US BB tree).

3) Comes from a low-population state.

Hey... Bork off. It's my state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
594 posts
4,461 battles

If it was going to be done, @Lert, I would consider the difference in service.

Washington would be improved secondaries and a 26-second, 9.2 kilometer radar.

South Dakota would be improved heal, minus two secondary turrets, and a 23-second, 9.2 kilometer radar.

Indiana would be DFAA.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,877
[NSF]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,300 posts
9,116 battles
2 minutes ago, BrandonKF said:

If it was going to be done, @Lert, I would consider the difference in service.

Washington would be improved secondaries and a 26-second, 9.2 kilometer radar.

South Dakota would be improved heal, minus two secondary turrets, and a 23-second, 9.2 kilometer radar.

Indiana would be DFAA.

 

If anyone had call for DFAA, it would have been Alabama because of her role at the Marianas.

 

Really, Indiana is one of those ships that could easily just be a copy-paste like the Myoko clones that you get from some mission. Do it like Atago where she just doesn’t get the regular premium bonuses. Honestly that’s the only way we’re going to see a hell of a lot of famous names anyways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
594 posts
4,461 battles
1 minute ago, Big_Spud said:

 

If anyone had call for DFAA, it would have been Alabama because of her role at the Marianas.

 

Really, Indiana is one of those ships that could easily just be a copy-paste like the Myoko clones that you get from some mission.

Indiana pulled it off before then.

But if we were doing a skin refit to Alabama, like the Kobayashi camos, I wouldn't disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,877
[NSF]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,300 posts
9,116 battles
1 minute ago, BrandonKF said:

Indiana pulled it off before then.

But if we were doing a skin refit to Alabama, like the Kobayashi camos, I wouldn't disagree.

 

Indiana also pulled off ramming Washington before anyone else, but hey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
594 posts
4,461 battles
Just now, Big_Spud said:

 

Indiana also pulled off ramming Washington before anyone else, but hey.

Whoa whoa. Washington rammed Indiana, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,877
[NSF]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,300 posts
9,116 battles
2 minutes ago, BrandonKF said:

Whoa whoa. Washington rammed Indiana, right?

 

Right, which is why Indiana wasnt the one blamed by the report for the collision, and totally didn’t have her CO removed from duty following a report that deffinitely wasn’t scathing about his decision to perform the exact opposite maneuver that he announced he would over the radio in the middle of the night, while in the middle of a tight cruising formation.

 

Totes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
546
[TNP66]
Beta Testers
1,896 posts
4,583 battles
19 minutes ago, BrandonKF said:

Hey... Bork off. It's my state.

Did you know that there was a battleship prior to BB58 called BB50 http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/50.htm

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota-class_battleship_(1920)

those are 406 mm guns incase your wondering 3 more than the later BB58 USS Indiana

 

015449.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×