Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
DrHolmes52

Italian Battleship Guinio Bruto

45 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,855
[WOLFG]
Members
8,569 posts
6,939 battles
Just now, saintsfan1622000 said:

I'd think that's the tier 6 test version of the GC, but maybe not? 

Googling Guinio Bruto didn't bring up anything, so probably is the test version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
411
[SUCIT]
Members
1,006 posts
17,577 battles
7 minutes ago, DrHolmes52 said:

At tier VI, from the patch notes. 

https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/development/update-081-british-squadrons/

No news of this before.

 

Pretty sure it is the T6 Cesar, just renamed so there will be no confusion between T5 Cesar and the new T6 version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,172
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts

Test versions for a number of ships have been added. GC to T6 (tears and cheers), curious what they are testing with Le Terrible (she's a great sleeper, genuinely overpowered in the right hands but most cannot make her work), I selfishly hope they are not nerfing her but I can sorta see why they would, a new Cleveland with an ROF nerf and HP Buff, which is a nice thought but not what she actually needs (both Baltimore and Cleveland need a +1-1.5 km range buff, that range being balanced by their floaty shells allowing them to punish stopped campers but allowing nimble long ranged targets to largely ignore them), and Kagero with some close in, devistating torps.

Edited by _RC1138

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
72
[-PVE-]
Members
246 posts
12,839 battles

They really don't want me to come back to this game do they! This is such a slippery slope they are starting. While I would probable play the GC more at tier 6 this is bad because of the precedent it sets for other premium ships. Not a whine or a threat to leave, it's just between this and the way they have implemented the CV rework, I have no desire to play this game (or spend money on this game.) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,069
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
4,701 posts
19 minutes ago, Mykawa said:

They really don't want me to come back to this game do they! This is such a slippery slope they are starting. While I would probable play the GC more at tier 6 this is bad because of the precedent it sets for other premium ships. Not a whine or a threat to leave, it's just between this and the way they have implemented the CV rework, I have no desire to play this game (or spend money on this game.) 

. . . and yet here you are, continuing to hang out on the forums.

  • Cool 2
  • Meh 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
668
[UFFA]
Members
2,065 posts
75 battles

I'm going to guess this is some unknown meme to me at this point. Giunio. Just take two seconds to make sure you are spelling the Italian ship names correctly like y'all do for every other frigging nation in the game. :cap_popcorn:

 

Test ship that kicked off all the rage about the Cesare re-balance for the past month so not sure how you missed it.  Yay for karma farming.

Pgzq8r9.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
491
[ERN]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
1,294 posts
25 minutes ago, Mykawa said:

They really don't want me to come back to this game do they! This is such a slippery slope they are starting. While I would probable play the GC more at tier 6 this is bad because of the precedent it sets for other premium ships. Not a whine or a threat to leave, it's just between this and the way they have implemented the CV rework, I have no desire to play this game (or spend money on this game.) 

Exactly! The covenant is that they make NO SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES TO PREMIUM SHIPS/TANKS/PLANES...and here they go phuking around and doing just that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
682
[-BSK-]
Members
1,481 posts
7,283 battles
1 hour ago, saintsfan1622000 said:

It looks like Guinio Bruto was one of Julius Cesar's assassins. I believe WG is using the new name as a bit of a pun. 

et tu Brute

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,172
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
14 minutes ago, Redwing6 said:

Exactly! The covenant is that they make NO SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES TO PREMIUM SHIPS/TANKS/PLANES...and here they go phuking around and doing just that. 

What covenant? And what a stupid standard to hold them to. A standard that no other developer is held to. I think a great many player needs to place themselves in a box with an SNES if they want to avoid this kind of behavior because if you haven't heard; game's as a service are in, and part of that is CONSTANT rebalancing.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
514
[BUN]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,534 posts
4,426 battles
13 minutes ago, 0NutsNBolts0 said:

et tu Brute

beat me to it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240
[SFOR]
Members
996 posts
7,846 battles
15 minutes ago, Battleship_Elisabeth said:

Excellent work, Wargaming! You've solved a problem that didn't exist! Er... created a problem where there was none...? ...failed to solve a problem of your own making?...

...

...

*Crickets.*

*A distant wolf howls.*

tenor.gif?itemid=5426919

GOOD JOB!

For the people that have problems understanding the reality. Just take a look at this.

https://na.wows-numbers.com/ship/3765384944,Giulio-Cesare/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,366
[R-F]
Members
1,770 posts
10,221 battles
25 minutes ago, _no_one_ said:

For the people that have problems understanding the reality. Just take a look at this.

https://na.wows-numbers.com/ship/3765384944,Giulio-Cesare/

found the problem! It needs an AA buff.  Only category that it's not head and shoulders above every other T5 BB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
491
[ERN]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
1,294 posts
34 minutes ago, _RC1138 said:

What covenant? And what a stupid standard to hold them to. A standard that no other developer is held to. I think a great many player needs to place themselves in a box with an SNES if they want to avoid this kind of behavior because if you haven't heard; game's as a service are in, and part of that is CONSTANT rebalancing.

WG has said repeatedly that they won't make substantive changes to ANY premium vehicle...and yet, here they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,172
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
3 minutes ago, Redwing6 said:

WG has said repeatedly that they won't make substantive changes to ANY premium vehicle...and yet, here they are.

Actually they haven't. We've done this back and forth before and the actual 'promise' everyone is (mis)quoting is that they will make every effort not to, but stopped short of an absolute prohibition. Which makes sense given that games LONG before even WoT's came out have been nerfing premium content and it's only here that it is treated like a big deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
668
[UFFA]
Members
2,065 posts
75 battles
56 minutes ago, Redwing6 said:

Exactly! The covenant is that they make NO SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES TO PREMIUM SHIPS/TANKS/PLANES...and here they go phuking around and doing just that. 

I'd much prefer to see a reduction in efficiency™ in tier. WG is avoiding that land mine by jumping the ship up a tier. Screaming nerf instead of re-tier is a bit ingenious to me.

WG has decided on a fairly weak interpretation of the barrage ability of the 100/47 that hurts the cruisers and Cesare badly. I can only hope access to the steering mod offsets seeing tier VIII carriers. :Smile_facepalm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,928
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
11,097 posts
15,168 battles
2 hours ago, saintsfan1622000 said:

I'd think that's the tier 6 test version of the GC, but maybe not? 

Very likely this ^^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
491
[ERN]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
1,294 posts
13 minutes ago, Sparviero said:

I'd much prefer to see a reduction in efficiency™ in tier. WG is avoiding that land mine by jumping the ship up a tier. Screaming nerf instead of re-tier is a bit ingenious to me.

WG has decided on a fairly weak interpretation of the barrage ability of the 100/47 that hurts the cruisers and Cesare badly. I can only hope access to the steering mod offsets seeing tier VIII carriers. :Smile_facepalm:

It won't. I bought the damn thing because it wasn't going to see above T7. Now it will, so it is useless to me, and many of the poeple who bought it in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,172
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
21 minutes ago, Sparviero said:

I'd much prefer to see a reduction in efficiency™ in tier. WG is avoiding that land mine by jumping the ship up a tier. Screaming nerf instead of re-tier is a bit ingenious to me. 

I frankly would rather have it at T6 all things being equal. For one, I can use it in Operations again, which is not nothing (especially for Captain Training), and for two, she makes more sense at T6. She's in her post rework setup, just like QE/Warspite (who GC faced as a CONTEMPORARY opponent) and as such, fits MUCH more in the T6, post WWI launch/rework than in the T5, Jutland era ships (and yes, the Kongo SHOULD ALSO be uptiered and reworked given she's in her 1930's setup, I have thought that since Beta). When they, if they, get to an Italian BB line, I expect a non reworked Cavour at T5.

But comparing say, side-by-side to a Queen Elizabeth Class:

Commissioning (Class): QE: 1914, Cavour: 1914

Displacement: QE: Reworked, ~24000 Tonnes, Cavour: 23500 tonnes

Length: QE: 190 p/p, Cavour: 170 p/p

Beam: QE: 29 m (rework w/ bulge), Cavour: 29 m (rework w/ bulge)

Speed: QE: Rework, 23.5-24.3 knots, depending on the ship, Cavour: 27 Knots

Armour: QE: 330 mm, Cavour: 250 mm (the most striking difference)

Armament: QE: 2x4 361mm BL 15 Mk I's, Cavours 10 320mm guns.

In game terms, the Cavours trade speed (and RoF) for Armor vs. the QE's slower (and worse range which has never given sense ESPECIALLY in the context of Warspite vs. GC but w/e), but over-match capable guns in their reworked status. The reality is the GC should always have been at T6 in the Rework status, and at least now that will be corrected.
 

I'm still waiting for a T5 Pre-Rework Warspite and/or Barham (and a Secondary focused HMS Valiant at T6).

Edited by _RC1138

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,090
[KNMSU]
Members
7,086 posts
7,668 battles
1 hour ago, _no_one_ said:

For the people that have problems understanding the reality. Just take a look at this.

https://na.wows-numbers.com/ship/3765384944,Giulio-Cesare/

I reject your interpretation of reality wholesale. GC owners were scammed. S.C.A.M.M.E.D.

  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
424
[UN1]
Members
1,007 posts
3,315 battles

The alchemists at the Wargaming labs were able to collect enough whine, rage saliva, and salty tears from the player base to convert it into the steel tonnage necessary to create a brand new T6 Italian battleship. 

I'm being facetious, but I'm excited for the potential to purchase this T6 BB.

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×