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

Speculation on Pan European ships (including Viribus Unitis)

20 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

92
[MWM]
Supertester
284 posts
7,135 battles

I would really love to see Pan-Europe/America/Asia get full lines.

I think the Pan-Asia DDs were a great start and would love to see CAs, BBs...etc for each of the Pan-lines 

Thanks for making this post it good to get the idea out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,011
[SALVO]
Members
17,714 posts
18,486 battles
11 minutes ago, Malarkey_ said:

I would really love to see Pan-Europe/America/Asia get full lines.

I think the Pan-Asia DDs were a great start and would love to see CAs, BBs...etc for each of the Pan-lines 

Thanks for making this post it good to get the idea out there.

Honestly, I think that it's probably a stretch to expect full lines for most of these Pan <whatever> trees, except perhaps for DDs.  I tend to see a Pan European "tree" as more of a catch-all for all the various minor European navies, such as Austria-Hungary (not really that minor a navy in WW1, but ceased to exist after WW1), the Netherlands, Spain, Poland, Turkey, and so on.  A lot of potential for a bunch of premiums but maybe not as much potential for full lines other than DDs.  (DD lines are that hard to produce since DDs are cheap and even minor navies tend to have some.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
92
[MWM]
Supertester
284 posts
7,135 battles
1 minute ago, Crucis said:

Honestly, I think that it's probably a stretch to expect full lines for most of these Pan <whatever> trees, except perhaps for DDs.  I tend to see a Pan European "tree" as more of a catch-all for all the various minor European navies, such as Austria-Hungary (not really that minor a navy in WW1, but ceased to exist after WW1), the Netherlands, Spain, Poland, Turkey, and so on.  A lot of potential for a bunch of premiums but maybe not as much potential for full lines other than DDs.  (DD lines are that hard to produce since DDs are cheap and even minor navies tend to have some.)

I wouldn't expect them to have full lines to be honest just hopeful dreaming since that is a major undertaking for any nation to produce a battleship, but even if it was other nations and refits like the Nueve de Julio was for CAs would be nice. I just over like the idea because it doesn't pressure them into  full lines for that nation when they can simple label it under "Pan-X" and put it a the line. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,647
[DAKI]
[DAKI]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
12,847 posts
4,814 battles

I hope Viribus Unitis will be Pan-EU. Not because I want to buy it, but because it would be an injustice if an Austria-Hungarian BB goes into the German tech tree. I expect pan-EU to be able to put out a full DD and CL/CA line, with some BB and CV premiums.

Personally I'm looking forward to seeing the Design 1047 Dutch Scharnhorst, and the Spanish Canarias post-1953 refit (the none ugly version)

rhwwrJn.jpg

Canarias_C21_2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,518
[AHOY_]
Beta Testers
6,536 posts
3,588 battles

I have a feeling they will definitely move VU to a PanEU "nation". They also planned to move Blys there as well. This would just be enough reason for the UI team to actually make the change for Blys and VU.

5 minutes ago, Super_Dreadnought said:

I hope Viribus Unitis will be Pan-EU. Not because I want to buy it, but because it would be an injustice if an Austria-Hungarian BB goes into the German tech tree. I expect pan-EU to be able to put out a full DD and CL/CA line, with some BB and CV premiums.

Personally I'm looking forward to seeing the Design 1047 Dutch Scharnhorst, and the Spanish Canarias post-1953 refit (the none ugly version)

rhwwrJn.jpg

Lert would be squealing like a little girl if 1047 finally makes it in. He'd be like a cat on catnip if WG marketed 3 versions of the ship at different tiers, depending on the degree of performance and differences between design plans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,644
[HINON]
Supertester
19,657 posts
13,234 battles

@CaptainStevieX Listening to the video now, predictably mostly interested in your proposals for the Dutch ships.

Van Kinsbergen, yay!

Hm. Tromp as a low / mid tier cruiser? I have her as a med / high tier DD. Still trying to figure out how to tier Jacob van Heemskerck.

I would also put de Zeven Provincien at tier 8, owing to her ROF, made competitive by consumables.

Agreed on Java and de Ruyter, and I love how you went in depth on 1913 and 1047 - really holding out for 1047, I think she'd be awesomely fun! Still planning to write about 1913, but that will have to wait until Prinz Eitel Friedrich drops. Reason being that my favored design for 1913 would likely have carried the same guns that Eitel carries, and until my NDA lifts I'm not allowed to talk about their performance.

No real comment on the carriers, except that I loved how you discussed the Gadilla. I wrote about Rapana before.

Wolf, nice. I know them as 'Roofdier'. Could work at tier 2 if you buff their torpedoes a bit.

Admiralen, represent! I place them at tier 4 / 5 depending on torpedoes, with one of them as optional premium for tier 6. You say they had a plane catapult, but they never did have an actual catapult. They carried a plane, but it had to be lowered into the water to launch. Just a minor nitpick.

Gerard Callenburgh, nice. Again, still planning to write about them in a large proposal thread, just trying to work out some tiering and other issues.

Bwahahaha! You talked about Friesland! The problem about not having torpedoes is solved by two of the Friesland's having carried 2x 4 533mm torpedoes for some months, flanking the superstructure amidships. I'd love Friesland in game, but they'd have to - uhm - 'reign in' the ROF a bit to around 30-ish. As a side note, some of the Frieslands were clocked at 42-ish knots during trials.

Thank you for making this video! I agree with your tiering - with some exceptions, mostly Tromp. Nice information, too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,644
[HINON]
Supertester
19,657 posts
13,234 battles
14 minutes ago, YamatoA150 said:

Lert would be squealing like a little girl if 1047 finally makes it in.

Oh yeah. Much bouncing, hyperventilating and squealing will happen the moment 1047 is announced. Soooo much squealing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
235
[UFFA]
[UFFA]
Members
876 posts
63 battles
7 minutes ago, Lert said:

Oh yeah. Much bouncing, hyperventilating and squealing will happen the moment 1047 is announced. Soooo much squealing.

Lert confirms 1047 in development.
 giphy.gif

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,644
[HINON]
Supertester
19,657 posts
13,234 battles
1 minute ago, Sparviero said:

Lert confirms 1047 in development.

Take from my post what you will, if you must draw unfounded conclusions. Thing is, they'd be stupid not to - it's a viable and likely fun mid tier ship that's considerably less paper / theoretical than some of the ships already in the game. Eventually they're going to run low on ships and 1047 will start to look more and more appealing for implementation.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
235
[UFFA]
[UFFA]
Members
876 posts
63 battles
1 minute ago, Lert said:

Take from my post what you will, if you must draw unfounded conclusions. Thing is, they'd be stupid not to - it's a viable and likely fun mid tier ship that's considerably less paper / theoretical than some of the ships already in the game. Eventually they're going to run low on ships and 1047 will start to look more and more appealing for implementation.

Would you like some tequila with your salt?
ggzshDr.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,644
[HINON]
Supertester
19,657 posts
13,234 battles
2 minutes ago, Sparviero said:

Would you like some tequila with your salt?

Nope. No salt here. Just covering my aft. There's always some 'funny guy' going like "HA! HE SAID A WORD! THAT MEANS THINGS!". This time it's you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
235
[UFFA]
[UFFA]
Members
876 posts
63 battles
1 minute ago, Lert said:

Nope. No salt here. Just covering my aft. There's always some 'funny guy' going like "HA! HE SAID A WORD! THAT MEANS THINGS!". This time it's you.

I'm sorry you seem to have misspelled petulant. :cap_like:

A joke was made there was no reason to get fussy. I get it I'm not popular around these parts. That doesn't mean you have to be an [edited]to me every single time. And with that I'm out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,644
[HINON]
Supertester
19,657 posts
13,234 battles
Just now, Sparviero said:

I'm sorry you seem to have misspelled petulant. :cap_like:

Just clarifying that what I post cannot be taken as any indication about possible upcoming content. Which then you took personal, apparently?

1 minute ago, Sparviero said:

 I get it I'm not popular around these parts. That doesn't mean you have to be an [edited]to me every single time.

Who are you again? No, really, I've got no idea why you think I have something personal against you? I'm confused. This is nothing personal, I don't even recognize your name.

2 minutes ago, Sparviero said:

A joke was made

A tiiiiiiiiired, old and nonsense one that's often taken too real by people. I get it. I'm an ST. I know things people don't. I have to watch every single word I type. I get it. I get reminded of this enough. 'Jokes' are witty / funny. You weren't.

Apparently you can make tired, stupid 'jokes' all you want, but I can't reply to them or I'm being

5 minutes ago, Sparviero said:

petulant

and

5 minutes ago, Sparviero said:

fussy

?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
571
[KP]
Members
2,066 posts
19,183 battles
1 hour ago, Crucis said:

Honestly, I think that it's probably a stretch to expect full lines for most of these Pan <whatever> trees, except perhaps for DDs.  I tend to see a Pan European "tree" as more of a catch-all for all the various minor European navies, such as Austria-Hungary (not really that minor a navy in WW1, but ceased to exist after WW1), the Netherlands, Spain, Poland, Turkey, and so on.  A lot of potential for a bunch of premiums but maybe not as much potential for full lines other than DDs.  (DD lines are that hard to produce since DDs are cheap and even minor navies tend to have some.)

Don't forget the Greek Ex USS Mississippi sunk by Stukas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,644
[HINON]
Supertester
19,657 posts
13,234 battles
1 hour ago, Crucis said:

Honestly, I think that it's probably a stretch to expect full lines for most of these Pan <whatever> trees, except perhaps for DDs.

AFAIK the nationality is meant to serve mostly as a catch-all for minor European nation premiums, rather than a researchable tree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,011
[SALVO]
Members
17,714 posts
18,486 battles
17 minutes ago, IronMike11B4O said:

Don't forget the Greek Ex USS Mississippi sunk by Stukas.

That was the point of writing "and so on".  I know that Turkey had an interned German BC that ended being transferred to Turkey's navy.  I know that Spain had a small number of home built battleships in the WW1 era.  There's not the slightest doubt in my mind that many European nations had destroyers, because pretty much any nation larger than a city state can afford a DD or 2.  I have no doubt that the Austria-Hungarians must have had a few cruisers and more than a few DDs, since any nation that can a) afford its own BBs and b) has the capacity to built those BBs in their own ship yards, can also build cruisers, and would need cruisers to screen those BBs.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,011
[SALVO]
Members
17,714 posts
18,486 battles
5 minutes ago, Lert said:

AFAIK the nationality is meant to serve mostly as a catch-all for minor European nation premiums, rather than a researchable tree.

Exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
571
[KP]
Members
2,066 posts
19,183 battles
45 minutes ago, Crucis said:

That was the point of writing "and so on".  I know that Turkey had an interned German BC that ended being transferred to Turkey's navy.  I know that Spain had a small number of home built battleships in the WW1 era.  There's not the slightest doubt in my mind that many European nations had destroyers, because pretty much any nation larger than a city state can afford a DD or 2.  I have no doubt that the Austria-Hungarians must have had a few cruisers and more than a few DDs, since any nation that can a) afford its own BBs and b) has the capacity to built those BBs in their own ship yards, can also build cruisers, and would need cruisers to screen those BBs.  

I wish on the internet you could add a jerking your chain voice to my writing so that way you would know I was jerking your chain. 

Carry On :)

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.

×