Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
rafael_azuaje

armored secondary guns & AA In cruiser and Battleship

49 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

107
[TFP]
Members
864 posts
27,748 battles

if the secondary guns had armor because in wows NO?
the ships if they can have their secondary guns with their shield of 10,20,30mm etc. even they can be destroyed.

 

A example:

HdkZizJ.jpeg

same guns secondaries

DbC9Jz4.jpeg

KRON secondairies 100mm &150mm and AA 37mm 4x1 without armored , but historical if had armored guns 
zQk1cRx.jpeg

F8sdEr7.jpeg

 

Yamato armored 127MM & AA

127mm better armored 

I1CgidW.jpeg

guns 127mm armored light

bQh5pdG.jpeg

AA armored yamato

c8U4LtK.jpeg

 

mogami&musashi

155mm same guns 

g6i7mxU.jpeg

same guns 155mm

dNVR9HW.jpeg

 

I think that WG should add armor to the secondary ones, equally they can be destroyed....

 

And finally the directors of secondary shots that function when the secondary batteries are in action. for all the cruisers and battleships here another example...

 

rjzGsMD.jpeg

this gives more realism and more fun

Lsc5v70.jpeg

the secondary firing directors must rotate according to their cannons, not all cruisers and battleships have secondary shooting directors, because they are very old.

 

 

 

Edited by rafael_azuaje
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,307
[D-PN]
[D-PN]
Beta Testers
8,144 posts
21,453 battles

@rafael_azuaje They do even though it is not specifically made known to us since This is a Game! Not a Simulator of actual Naval Combat! If they had every little detail included none of us could afford Super Computer time to play it!

Once again! This Is A GAME! Got it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
83
[_ARP_]
Members
734 posts
33,635 battles

i feel that the République should have armored secondaries, since they r so easily destroyed

 

Spoiler

thats why i gave up on 2ndary build on the République -_-

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,210
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
13,227 posts
18,423 battles
53 minutes ago, rafael_azuaje said:

this gives more realism and more fun

Nobody cares about realism, or the lack of same, in this game. And it would not give more fun, which is derived principally from destroying ships and their component parts. Welcome to B A L A N C E !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
107
[TFP]
Members
864 posts
27,748 battles
42 minutes ago, Umikami said:

Nobody cares about realism, or the lack of same, in this game. And it would not give more fun, which is derived principally from destroying ships and their component parts. Welcome to B A L A N C E !

I see that you are basic, and do not innovate any idea to improve the game... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,001 posts
564 battles
30 minutes ago, rafael_azuaje said:

I see that you are basic, and do not innovate any idea to improve the game... 

ljky0xQ.gif

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
107
[TFP]
Members
864 posts
27,748 battles
2 hours ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

@rafael_azuaje They do even though it is not specifically made known to us since This is a Game! Not a Simulator of actual Naval Combat! If they had every little detail included none of us could afford Super Computer time to play it!

Once again! This Is A GAME! Got it?

It is not necessary to have a super PC. simply, if the armored guns rotate from right to left telemeters too. with respect to the shielding of the secondary ones it is so that it is reflected when we examine the armor of the ship in complete. I do not understand why some criticize that.

Edited by rafael_azuaje

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,307
[D-PN]
[D-PN]
Beta Testers
8,144 posts
21,453 battles

@rafael_azuaje It is not necessary for WG to include every minute detail since once again This Is A Game! And yes if they did do so a Super Computer would be needed to play it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
182
[SPTR]
Members
2,297 posts
2,035 battles

Dude. The game is an arcade game, not a sim. Do not expect every aspect of a ship to be 100% historical. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
107
[TFP]
Members
864 posts
27,748 battles
32 minutes ago, minor_correction said:

If you get those 0 HP penetrations, is that not an indicator that the secondary armor may be working? 

you can see that in the game it does not have an indicator of the secondary batteries, and I should say how much shielding it has. that's the right thing to do because they are cannons and they are obviously armor, all ships of all nations including USN have armored secondary. that is not a buff simply to reflect its armor.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
107
[TFP]
Members
864 posts
27,748 battles
4 minutes ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

@rafael_azuaje It is not necessary for WG to include every minute detail since once again This Is A Game! And yes if they did do so a Super Computer would be needed to play it!

you know in the past there was pacific battlestation and it was an arcade game of 2010, and the secondary double purpose had animation to shoot down planes and sink ships

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
107
[TFP]
Members
864 posts
27,748 battles
8 minutes ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

@rafael_azuaje It is not necessary for WG to include every minute detail since once again This Is A Game! And yes if they did do so a Super Computer would be needed to play it!

it's animation friend just that. wows asks for little graphics and has always been like that. the only thing that asks for a lot of hard disk space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
182
[SPTR]
Members
2,297 posts
2,035 battles
Just now, rafael_azuaje said:

it's animation friend just that. wows asks for little graphics and has always been like that. the only thing that asks for a lot of hard disk space.

And this is an ARCADE, friend. WG does not have to animate every single piece out there, nor create hit boxes or armour profiles for everything. That would make playing impossible for those who play on lower-end computers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
107
[TFP]
Members
864 posts
27,748 battles
10 minutes ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

@rafael_azuaje the level of detail is sufficient and an increase in eye candy is certainly not necessary!

Well I will try to propose my proposal in the forum. I do not think that 2 rangefinders with animation of turning from right to left burn your Pc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
182
[SPTR]
Members
2,297 posts
2,035 battles
1 minute ago, rafael_azuaje said:

Well I will try to propose my proposal in the forum. I do not think that 2 rangefinders with animation of turning from right to left burn your Pc. 

No, but no one's complaining it's not there. U made ur proposal, and u got the feedback. Now let it go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
182
[SPTR]
Members
2,297 posts
2,035 battles
3 minutes ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

@rafael_azuaje maybe not but who is going to notice the movement any way while battling?

No one. OP wants this too look like a movie or something...

Edited by 7_3_PowerStroke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
107
[TFP]
Members
864 posts
27,748 battles
4 minutes ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

@7_3_PowerStroke The main turrets moving is sufficient and they didn't need to include that level of detail either!

??? Why not ask ships to be static? , no movement ... that's your best idea ... wows with static secondaries would be horrible. but if you suffer for that improvement ... go to the menu and disable the animations ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
182
[SPTR]
Members
2,297 posts
2,035 battles
7 minutes ago, rafael_azuaje said:

??? Why not ask ships to be static? , no movement ... that's your best idea ... wows with static secondaries would be horrible. but if you suffer for that improvement ... go to the menu and disable the animations ..

It's not that he suffers from it, but its that we don't need/want it in-game. And kill the sarcasm. It's the best way to get no one to take u seriously.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
182
[SPTR]
Members
2,297 posts
2,035 battles
3 minutes ago, Lampshade_M1A2 said:

Why not? Any improvements to visual effects should be welcomed.

Cuz it wouldn't be welcomed by those that have lower end potato pc's and some just want to focus on the game, not the little moving objects on the side of their botes. If WG would work with moviemakers cuz they have really nice cinema-graphics(see the into video in the login screen) then I would be all for it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×