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

Wargaming please give us Mutsu 1943

58 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

6,424
[DAKI]
[DAKI]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
12,546 posts
4,422 battles

First of all kudos to WG. They have listened to the outcry over WV, and have made a very sensible compromise by renaming the current ship WV'41, and promising a late war WV'44 later.

But now that the genie is out of the bottle, and the precedent of selling the same ship from different time periods has been set, I'd like to draw your attention to this ship:

NPCMQbr.jpg

Mutsu was a ship which had been requested very early on, and always turned up on 'what ship you want to see' threads. I am very confident however in saying that IJN BB fans hoping for Mutsu were wanting the 1943 final form, and NOT a regurgitated old Nagato A hull. Unfortunately there wasn't enough rioting for WG to give a crap and recycled goods is what we got.

Unsurprisingly this lazy cashgrab was poorly received, and though I don't have sales figures I'd bet it sold badly. Seeing another player in a Mutsu is like spotting Big Foot. On WoWS Stats and numbers Mutsu has a lifetime battle count of 128,339 on the NA server. Normandie, the ship with the second lowest battle count dwarfs this with 410,308. I think it's safe to say that this unwanted ship is a failure.

But WG has a chance to revisit Mutsu now, thanks to the precedent set by WV. 

Go on Wargaming. Give the IJN BB fans the tier 7 1943 Mutsu they actually wanted. It wouldn't even be too much work since it'd be a fully upgraded Nagato with even worse AA and some tweaks here and there. Keep the current Mutsu as it is and maybe rename it to Mutsu 1925 or something, then create a new Mutsu 1943. It'd sell like hotcakes, I predict far better than the current Mutsu. WG gets our money, fans get the Mutsu they actually wanted, and everyone is happy.

  • Cool 10
  • Boring 3
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,941
[HINON]
Supertester
19,247 posts
12,793 battles

I think there are way too many unique ships (and nations) not in this game yet that could be introduced before offering a second variant on a ship already in the game.

  • Cool 6
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,424
[DAKI]
[DAKI]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
12,546 posts
4,422 battles
7 minutes ago, Lert said:

I think there are way too many unique ships (and nations) not in this game yet that could be introduced before offering a second variant on a ship already in the game.

I would not say that Ashitaka and Kii were particularly unique and interesting ships for the IJN. One of them bombed even harder than Mutsu. Also there is Musashi.:Smile_teethhappy:

I'm not saying that Mutsu 1943 should be immediate, but imho WG needs to seriously consider this option for some time in the future.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
514 posts
62 battles
29 minutes ago, Super_Dreadnought said:

I would not say that Ashitaka and Kii were particularly unique and interesting ships for the IJN. One of them bombed even harder than Mutsu. Also there is Musashi.:Smile_teethhappy:

I'm not saying that Mutsu 1943 should be immediate, but imho WG needs to seriously consider this option for some time in the future.

Ashitaka is both unique and tons of fun mate. 

 

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,640 posts
7,482 battles
50 minutes ago, Super_Dreadnought said:

I would not say that Ashitaka and Kii were particularly unique and interesting ships for the IJN. One of them bombed even harder than Mutsu. Also there is Musashi.:Smile_teethhappy:

I'm not saying that Mutsu 1943 should be immediate, but imho WG needs to seriously consider this option for some time in the future.

The issue with the Ashitaka/Mutsu debate is that the pure reason WG released them was because they could easily reuse the assets. Very little if any resources were devoted to them no doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,152
[SCTFB]
[SCTFB]
Beta Testers
3,984 posts
15,757 battles

I want my Hyuga

 

download (3).jpg

tenor.gif

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
161
[POP]
Members
599 posts
12,025 battles

    Didn't Mutsu explode in 1943? I think you can technically get that in game already if you want it. :)

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 4
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
562 posts
2,102 battles

If they did that it would be nice if current mutsu owners could have the option of upgrading at a discount.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
228
[AR15]
Members
450 posts
2,982 battles

See, I called this sh*t from a mile away.  I said as soon as you do a dated ship people will want all kinds of diff versions of ships we already have and we didnt even make it 24-48 hours after I said it.   While I would have loved a Nagato clone we got Mutsu T6 and that was their one chance in my book.   We do not need a premium for every refit a ship ever received, so no we do not need another Mutsu.   The only ship Id even remotely consider this for is the Musashi at T10 as a secondary built ship based on 100mm high pen HE like the new line of IJN DD with significantly reduced gun sigma down to like 1.7 or 1.8 and not as a premium but as a second IJN BB lines top ship.

 

For now I say no to this idea, told them this would be a can of worms.

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,555
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
3,874 posts
5,259 battles
1 hour ago, Super_Dreadnought said:

First of all kudos to WG. They have listened to the outcry over WV, and have made a very sensible compromise by renaming the current ship WV'41, and promising a late war WV'44 later.

But now that the genie is out of the bottle, and the precedent of selling the same ship from different time periods has been set, I'd like to draw your attention to this ship:

NPCMQbr.jpg

Mutsu was a ship which had been requested very early on, and always turned up on 'what ship you want to see' threads. I am very confident however in saying that IJN BB fans hoping for Mutsu were wanting the 1943 final form, and NOT a regurgitated old Nagato A hull. Unfortunately there wasn't enough rioting for WG to give a crap and recycled goods is what we got.

Unsurprisingly this lazy cashgrab was poorly received, and though I don't have sales figures I'd bet it sold badly. Seeing another player in a Mutsu is like spotting Big Foot. On WoWS Stats and numbers Mutsu has a lifetime battle count of 128,339 on the NA server. Normandie, the ship with the second lowest battle count dwarfs this with 410,308. I think it's safe to say that this unwanted ship is a failure.

But WG has a chance to revisit Mutsu now, thanks to the precedent set by WV. 

Go on Wargaming. Give the IJN BB fans the tier 7 1943 Mutsu they actually wanted. It wouldn't even be too much work since it'd be a fully upgraded Nagato with even worse AA and some tweaks here and there. Keep the current Mutsu as it is and maybe rename it to Mutsu 1925 or something, then create a new Mutsu 1943. It'd sell like hotcakes, I predict far better than the current Mutsu. WG gets our money, fans get the Mutsu they actually wanted, and everyone is happy.

What’s the advantage of a Mutsu over Nagato?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,070
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
16,190 posts
11,707 battles
1 hour ago, Lert said:

I think there are way too many unique ships (and nations) not in this game yet that could be introduced before offering a second variant on a ship already in the game.

This, I am still hoping that they walk back the stupidity of West Virginia 41 and rename it Maryland

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,424
[DAKI]
[DAKI]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
12,546 posts
4,422 battles
59 minutes ago, TheDreadnought said:

What’s the advantage of a Mutsu over Nagato?

I think it'd be the Hipper/Eugen situation again where soft stats would need to be tweaked. My understanding was that they were about the same up until the point Mutsu blew up.

The main difference would be that Mutsu never received the late war AA refits other IJN ships that made it that far got. Nagato's AA is already nothing much, so I think a hypothetical Mutsu 1943 would be abysmal at shooting down planes.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
870
[ICE9]
Members
842 posts
1 hour ago, crzyhawk said:

This, I am still hoping that they walk back the stupidity of West Virginia 41 and rename it Maryland

They do a lot of goofy stuff, for reasons known but to God. Still, I give them credit for trying.

I always wondered why they modeled Lexington as Saratoga. The Lady Lex did have her original 8" mounts replaced with 5"38's before the Coral Sea battle but retained the heavy tripod foremast missing from the late-war Sara Maru. Who knows?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,582
[-K-]
WoWS Wiki Editor, Members, Supertester, WoWS Community Contributors
4,733 posts
15,384 battles

 

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,648
[BIAS]
Members
3,154 posts
9,278 battles

What genie out of a bottle...?

We have Lo Yang and Nueve de Julio already in game which are just later variants of Benson and Boise. 

People think this is new, but we have had the same ship in the game multiple times for years now and no one seemed to care until now... 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,648
[BIAS]
Members
3,154 posts
9,278 battles
47 minutes ago, So_lt_Goes said:

They do a lot of goofy stuff, for reasons known but to God. Still, I give them credit for trying.

I always wondered why they modeled Lexington as Saratoga. The Lady Lex did have her original 8" mounts replaced with 5"38's before the Coral Sea battle but retained the heavy tripod foremast missing from the late-war Sara Maru. Who knows?

The tech tree ships are named after their class or lead ship of the class but are patterned off of different ships in the class depending on how they want to portray it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,471
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,839 posts
7,129 battles
3 hours ago, Lert said:

I think there are way too many unique ships (and nations) not in this game yet that could be introduced before offering a second variant on a ship already in the game.

perfectly applicable to discussion of West Virginia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,376
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
21,447 posts
3,875 battles
2 hours ago, TheDreadnought said:

What’s the advantage of a Mutsu over Nagato?

A T7 Mutsu could slot captains without retraining while preserving Nagato's play style.

 

EDIT: So, anonymous negative Nancy, what exactly is "bad" about the fundamental benefit any premium has over a tech tree ship of the same class?

Edited by KiyoSenkan
  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,093
[DAKI]
WoWS Wiki Editor
7,328 posts
6,609 battles
13 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

We have Lo Yang and Nueve de Julio already in game which are just later variants of Benson and Boise. 

We also have Makarov, which is Nürnberg but post-war and we have Krasny Krim which is Svietlana herself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
161
[POP]
Members
599 posts
12,025 battles
25 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

People think this is new, but we have had the same ship in the game multiple times for years now and no one seemed to care until now... 

    There was a lot of rumbling about the resale of A hulls on the Japanese line, TBH. But yeah it has been in game and the game does run on money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,265
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,804 posts
15,291 battles
25 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

People think this is new, but we have had the same ship in the game multiple times for years now and no one seemed to care until now... 

It started before the game was ever released, back in CBT, with the Omaha clone Murmansk, and then the Omaha clone Marblehead. So all this drama about something "NEW" that isn't really new also isn't really needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
220 posts
7,619 battles

I'd really like to see the USS Constellation in action brohans tell me what you think about that idea thanks for reading.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,555
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
3,874 posts
5,259 battles
28 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

A T7 Mutsu could slot captains without retraining while preserving Nagato's play style.

 

So, anonymous negative Nancy, what exactly is "bad" about the fundamental benefit any premium has over a tech tree ship of the same class?

Retracted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,376
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
21,447 posts
3,875 battles
2 minutes ago, TheDreadnought said:

So inferring idiot. 

I didn't say anything was "bad" about it.  I actually just had a question as to whether there were significant design differences between the existing Nagato, and the proposed Tier 7 Mutsu.  Sounds like there aren't.

Curiosity, that was all.  But you had to be a [edited] about it.

The second line is referring to the "Bad" votes that my post received, not you specifically. I guess that wasn't clear and I'm sorry about that.

Edited by KiyoSenkan
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,555
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
3,874 posts
5,259 battles
1 minute ago, KiyoSenkan said:

The second line is referring to the "Bad" votes that my post received, not you specifically.

Ahhh. .  ok.  That could have been more clear.  My bad though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×