Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Zaydin

Okay, funny joke WG

26 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,166
[DOTM]
Beta Testers
1,715 posts
12,188 battles

Can we remove Russian BBs now? It's a line that has zero right to exist. The Soviets couldn't even maintain battleships loaned to them by the Royal Navy (See how badly the Soviets took care of HMS Royal Sovereign), let alone build them.

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,042
[BNKR]
Members
1,649 posts
2,806 battles

They're fun to play. I don't care if they're part of the Zimbabwean People's Flotilla tech tree; if they're fun, that's what matters.

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,115
[SOV]
Members
4,638 posts
5 minutes ago, Zaydin said:

Can we remove Russian BBs now? It's a line that has zero right to exist. The Soviets couldn't even maintain battleships loaned to them by the Royal Navy (See how badly the Soviets took care of Royal Sovereign), let alone build them.

Look at there CV as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
112
[USNR]
Members
297 posts
3,902 battles
10 minutes ago, jags_domain said:

Look at there CV as well.

Wat......they have a CV....?

 

16 minutes ago, Zaydin said:

Can we remove Russian BBs now? It's a line that has zero right to exist. The Soviets couldn't even maintain battleships loaned to them by the Royal Navy (See how badly the Soviets took care of HMS Royal Sovereign), let alone build them.

 

11 minutes ago, RagingxMarmoset said:

They're fun to play. I don't care if they're part of the Zimbabwean People's Flotilla tech tree; if they're fun, that's what matters.

I can see both sides of the coin on this argument. I like to think I am a bit of a purist when it comes to historical accuracy, or at least appreciate an effort to balance that with "rewarding" play. WG has done a fair job until now of maintaining a respectable amount of historical accuracy, in particular with the accuracy of the ship models (Space battles pissed me off so much). Russian BB's were never a realistic prospect, at least in the geopolitical atmosphere of the 1930's-1940's in the region. The Russians did begin building several of the more advanced BB's, but the hulls were scrapped, and the batteries turned into shore mounts. 

This criticism, if leveled with full objectivity should be extended to other ships, such as the Montana, Conqueror, GK, and others. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,374
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
8,280 posts
12,151 battles
28 minutes ago, Zaydin said:

It's a line that has zero right to exist

nah, WG seems to think thats the right of the Italian lines

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,166
[DOTM]
Beta Testers
1,715 posts
12,188 battles
9 minutes ago, Rgtx1121 said:

Wat......they have a CV....?

The Admiral Kuznetsov or something like that. It's so poorly built it needs a supply ship with spare parts following it around at all times and needs a tug to travel with it in case its engines fail. And its functionally useless now since the only drydock they had that could service it was a floating dry dock that sank. A crane from said floating dry dock tore a gash in the flight deck, as well.,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,366
[_RNG_]
Supertester
3,176 posts
5,476 battles

This is a game, games need content.

 

Are you rather saying you would rather just cover every significant ship, then just have no new ships, ever?

 

If it is the line you are complaining about, it is a straightforward response from WG to people complaining about sniping BBs. The line performs well up close, given you know what you are doing. Most players with the VMF BBs right now are indeed the intelligent ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,289 posts
2,399 battles

They gotta appeal to the home crowd bro plus paper ships are fun for them to balance since there is no hard real world performance data that has to be considered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,115
[SOV]
Members
4,638 posts
12 minutes ago, Rgtx1121 said:

Wat......they have a CV....? 

Admiral Kuznetsov.

i think it made it back from the Middle East.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
311 posts
42 minutes ago, RagingxMarmoset said:

They're fun to play. I don't care if they're part of the Zimbabwean People's Flotilla tech tree; if they're fun, that's what matters.

I "used" to love playing T4 DDs - Clemson, Izyaslave etc - but since the arrival of the untouchable soviet BBs it is now also no longer any fun.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,258
[WORX]
Members
11,380 posts
19,183 battles

Bad content? Or content is right off the gates bad because the game is suffering from balance?

The tier 10 Kremlin should not be as feared the king himself the Yamato.. After playing a few games on the Kremlin, the king's power is less then a prince.

Its only going to get worse... The trend downward continues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,222
[--K--]
Members
1,351 posts
11,289 battles
20 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

Bad content? Or content is right off the gates bad because the game is suffering from balance?

The tier 10 Kremlin should not be as feared the king himself the Yamato.. After playing a few games on the Kremlin, the king's power is less then a prince.

Its only going to get worse... The trend downward continues.

Is the Kremlin that good? I have the Soyuz and it’s rather a mediocre tier 9, then again me and Iowa didn’t get along, but Montana is a beast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,258
[WORX]
Members
11,380 posts
19,183 battles
1 minute ago, USMC8sux said:

Is the Kremlin that good?

Once you know how to adapt to the RU BBs play style, They're OP hands down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,115
[SIM]
Members
5,365 posts
8,852 battles

Hey genius, it’s a freaking video game. A video game that already includes of blueprint and speculative designs. Why WG doesn’t start banning people like you from the forums, I will never understand.

  • Cool 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,996
[KSC]
Clan Supertest Coordinator
5,222 posts
8,347 battles
1 hour ago, Rgtx1121 said:

I like to think I am a bit of a purist when it comes to historical accuracy, or at least appreciate an effort to balance that with "rewarding" play. WG has done a fair job until now of maintaining a respectable amount of historical accuracy, in particular with the accuracy of the ship models (Space battles pissed me off so much). Russian BB's were never a realistic prospect, at least in the geopolitical atmosphere of the 1930's-1940's in the region. The Russians did begin building several of the more advanced BB's, but the hulls were scrapped, and the batteries turned into shore mounts. 

This criticism, if leveled with full objectivity should be extended to other ships, such as the Montana, Conqueror, GK, and others. 

I have to disagree.  I think this game is so far removed from historical accuracy I don't see much point in throwing a fit about more paper ships.  You don't have to play them if you don't want to, and the game is long past the point where fighting one more paper ship is going to make a difference.  You have battles where Japanese paper ships can be on the same team as American paper ships, fighting a combination of French, German and British fantasy ships made up by WG that didn't even exist on paper.  Once you start getting to higher tiers most BBs and cruisers are going to be paper anyway.  Of all the Tier 9 and 10 tech tree BBs only the Iowa and Yamato were actually completed.  Ironically enough the mere fact that construction was actually started on the Sovetsky Soyuz makes it one of the most "real" high tier BBs.  The Soviet BB line is filled with paper, but to my knowledge all of the ships were actually real designs...which is more than some other tech trees can boast.   

 

I can understand people who prefer real ships that actually existed and hold nothing against them for it....but anybody who is pretending that Soviet BBs are the straw that broke the camel's back in terms of game realism are kidding themselves or have other motivations. 

Edited by yashma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
338
[WKY12]
Members
799 posts
12,900 battles
1 hour ago, Zaydin said:

Can we remove Russian BBs now? It's a line that has zero right to exist. The Soviets couldn't even maintain battleships loaned to them by the Royal Navy (See how badly the Soviets took care of HMS Royal Sovereign), let alone build them.

It's a game, not real life. If you want real life walk away from the computer.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,374
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
8,280 posts
12,151 battles
2 hours ago, Zaydin said:

Can we remove Russian BBs now? It's a line that has zero right to exist. The Soviets couldn't even maintain battleships loaned to them by the Royal Navy (See how badly the Soviets took care of HMS Royal Sovereign), let alone build them.

iirc, ALL the Russian BBs existed as blue prints at the least, and iirc, Roon and Hidenburg ar 100% made up by WG, no blueprints of them, no napkin drawings, nothing, those 2 ships are completely fake and never even given a thought to make IRL, but they're fine, because they arent Russian right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
7 posts
2,555 battles

Just wanted to make sure everyone is aware of this. Not all the Russian ships are paper. The Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya is a ship we've had for a while now and it's not paper. The newly added Gangut Battleship is actually the Revolutsiya in her early years. I think it's pretty cool to see the WWI Battleship and learn its roots. It's also cool that it's not a premium.

Furthermore those of you stating that the game isn't historically accurate need to learn how much research and hard work went into this game. They recently redesigned the King of the Ocean, The Yamato. There isn't any  way to get a historical blueprint to make the Imperial Japanese Navy's Pride Flagship so they had to find out everything they could from the photos of her and the pieces of info about her. That ship is huge. It's detail is amazing. They even lowered the radio tower on the back of her because she had disabled her radio tower just before Operation Ten-Go. That's a small detail, but they did that so it was historically correct to her final hours. Props Wargaming. The only thing I'm not fond of is the matchmaking, but hey one battle at a time.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,119
[TDRB]
Members
5,148 posts
13,741 battles

What's with this strong resentment of Russian BB's? Yes, they are paper ships at best. But so are many other ships in this game. They are within playable balance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,299
[SALVO]
Members
2,507 posts
6,669 battles

Russian BBs are OP ?   Russian BBs can be fought and killed. Removed from the battle by blazing guns and torpedoes.  They at least fight where you can see em and hit em.   As long as CVs are there like Clicker Heros to lord over their preciuos dps over the battlefield. Untouchable as they skulk the edges of the maps.  There wont be a single ship that is too OP for me as the game has already been broken. 

Edited by eviltane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
7 posts
2,555 battles
8 minutes ago, tcbaker777 said:

iirc, ALL the Russian BBs existed as blue prints at the least, and iirc, Roon and Hidenburg ar 100% made up by WG, no blueprints of them, no napkin drawings, nothing, those 2 ships are completely fake and never even given a thought to make IRL, but they're fine, because they arent Russian right?

The Hindenburg is not fake

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_Hindenburg

Also the Roon may not be real, but it's not like it wasn't made for a reason. The game is made with a lot of ships. Ten ships per line per tree (except in some where they split.) The German Navy has a lot of heavy, hard hitting ships, but they are also repeated... Gneisenau, Sharnhorst, Bismark, and Tirpits are prime examples. 4 ships, but 2 are premium, and all 4 are divided into 2 classes. The Prinz and the Hipper are the same. They wanted to add something more because the tree would be very..... Similar otherwise. The German Cruisers, though many, are not all powerful enough to make tier 9. They needed to balance the tree somehow, and having Hindy at tier 9 and nothing else wouldn't work. 

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
7 posts
2,555 battles

BTW you want to kill the Russian BBS? Light some fires. They only have so many times they can put em out so fire and flood are very useful.... Unless you'd rather watch you AP bounce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
7 posts
2,555 battles
4 minutes ago, yashma said:

Something tells me you didn't actually read that article you linked.

hint:  That's not the Hindenburg in game  

It's still a Hindenburg. Either way you get my point. They never made a cruiser to complete in the high tiers. What should they do, just scrap the whole line?

Edited by RazorBlade9902
  • Meh 2

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.

×