Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Admiral_Thrawn_1

Does WOWs need Pre Dreadnaught Battle mode?

26 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,505
[RKLES]
Members
12,554 posts
14,283 battles

Looking at all the old protected cruisers, pre dreadnaught ect. Should Wargaming create some negative tiers, special battle modes, or entirely different game? Because some of the pre WWI ships could be rather fun to battle it out in. But due to the nature of low tier ships the options are rather limited without intentionally expanding upon the pre dreadnought ships. Although I see no reason why WOWs could not  host pre dreadnaughts vintage ship battles considering they already have a few of them.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
269
[USCG]
Members
617 posts
20,512 battles

I’d like to see some more tier 2-4 activities. I have numerous ships at that level that never get played because it doesn’t count towards daily missions, etc. 

Tier four ranked sprint???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,179
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts

I've said they should do negative tiers. They can even use it to flip the player curve in that the 'higher' tier ships progressively get worse and worse, and thus creating a greater challenge for more and more experienced players. As it stands the difficulty curve for this game rewards players who play more with better equipment, further enhancing their play, whereas most MP games (read: Really all MP games) either keep it flat (later unlocks no better, just different, than default equipment) or invert it, where later content is actually harder to use and more specialized but more potent in isolated ways that a more experienced player may be able to leverage; ships in WoWs just get plain better with each tier and it makes progression somewhat boring. Negative tiers could flip that and let the game have a more traditional, competitive balance.

Edited by _RC1138
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,069
[INTEL]
Members
13,283 posts
36,602 battles

They need ten pre-WOWs tiers, beginning with the steamships at the Battle of Lissa, and extending through the Dreadnought. Zillions of ships, endless premiums. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
27 posts
8,691 battles

More low tier ships, missions and some way of sorting new players and experienced players would be great to minimize seal clubbbing, perhaps u need ttier 10s to enter new pre dreadnought battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,206
[HEROS]
Members
2,002 posts
17,876 battles

I don't know why they DIDN'T do pre dreadnoughts.. certainly a very important part of warship development.  Certainly would have eased filling out the tiers too if tiers I,II, and III had been pre dreadnought era.  With a tier 0 for the training ships! 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
68
[STW-N]
Beta Testers
196 posts
25,209 battles

With so many paper ships one the top end of tier X they could have slid the lines up some and added more real ships on the early tiers.

Like remove Buffalo, Seattle and such napkin designs and move the one below up a tier, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34
[M-B]
[M-B]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
212 posts
11,286 battles

Always wanted a mode like that. Would give me a reason to use all my low tiers again that currently just sit there looking nice, but being quite useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,853
[TARK]
Members
7,047 posts
2,639 battles

Yup.

The predreadnought era has an order of magnitude more ships.

Plus, the predreadnought era ships were DESIGNED to fight in the players and WGs preferred combat meta.

WGs insistence that this is a ww2 game is a serious business strategy error that is costing them money and players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,115
Alpha Tester
2,552 posts
2 hours ago, TL_Warlord_Roff said:

I don't know why they DIDN'T do pre dreadnoughts.. certainly a very important part of warship development.

Because glorious Soviet Navy didn't exist during the pre-dreadnought era. Thus the game's timeline only covers WW2 and postwar, neglecting WW1 and completely disregarding pre-dreadnought era ships (other than Mikasa, which WG has said again and again that it was only an experiment that failed in their eyes).

Oh and WG is still salty about Tsushima.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,445 posts
7,009 battles
5 minutes ago, Wolcott said:

Because glorious Soviet Navy didn't exist during the pre-dreadnought era. Thus the game's timeline only covers WW2 and postwar, neglecting WW1 and completely disregarding pre-dreadnought era ships (other than Mikasa, which WG has said again and again that it was only an experiment that failed in their eyes).

Oh and WG is still salty about Tsushima.

To be fair, it's not JUST the Russians that remember Tsushima:

image.thumb.png.541892ee3ef13c1c5424dea0040371d8.png

 

That is the head of the Russian navy during a visit to Japan last month with his Japanese counterpart. The old guy in the framed picture is Admiral Togo.

 

Coincidence???

 

I think not.

 

 

Matt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,205
[IRNBN]
Members
3,523 posts
10,423 battles
1 hour ago, Wolcott said:

Because glorious Soviet Navy didn't exist during the pre-dreadnought era. Thus the game's timeline only covers WW2 and postwar, neglecting WW1 and completely disregarding pre-dreadnought era ships (other than Mikasa, which WG has said again and again that it was only an experiment that failed in their eyes).

Oh and WG is still salty about Tsushima.

Bunk.

All of the T2 and T3 Rusian cruisers are Tsarist-era pre-dreadnoughts, and a model for a WOWS Russian pre-dreadnought BB already exists. Borodino (1901) or Retvizan (1900) I think, but possibly some other one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
319
[WOLFC]
Members
502 posts
6,825 battles

Read my mind.

I was thinking you could easily do a separate I-X tier, Starting with ironclads and ending just before Dreadnought. Beginning ships: HMS Warrior, Gloire, USS New Ironsides, Kotetsu etc. Start the tree ~1860 or so. Adavantge of the whole line is that it'd have room for a number of other national navies, beyond the ones in the primary tier. Destroyers would only be present in something like their current form late in the tree if at all, and it'd focus mostly on the Ship of the line/battleship, light cruiser, and protected cruisers. You could even have premiums of unusual ships, like the Novgorod and such.

Since the concept of an "all-big-gun" main armament was one of Dreadnought's key innovations, I'd suggest having the ability to swtch between batteries during combat, similar to how the torpedo reticule changes. Largest guns would get the tightest reticule, and on down through 3 levels of armament to one that appears like the torpedo reticule, and covers and arc with whichever small guns are in that quarter.

I spend way too much time on stuff like this instead of working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,115
Alpha Tester
2,552 posts
1 hour ago, mobryan said:

To be fair, it's not JUST the Russians that remember Tsushima:

 

 

That is the head of the Russian navy during a visit to Japan last month with his Japanese counterpart. The old guy in the framed picture is Admiral Togo.

 

Coincidence???

 

I think not.

 

 

Matt

Of course the Japanese remember Tsushima because it was a great victory for them. Why wouldn't they?

28 minutes ago, TF77 said:

Bunk.

All of the T2 and T3 Rusian cruisers are Tsarist-era pre-dreadnoughts

That's just filler, stuff that WG has chosen to neglect ever since.

28 minutes ago, TF77 said:

and a model for a WOWS Russian pre-dreadnought BB already exists. Borodino (1901) or Retvizan (1900) I think, but possibly some other one.

Nyet comrade, you must be referring to this Borodino!

2.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,445 posts
7,009 battles
1 minute ago, Wolcott said:

Of course the Japanese remember Tsushima because it was a great victory for them. Why wouldn't they?

 

Well, there is remembering it, and then there is rubbing your opponents face in it a century later.

I'm on Japan's side in this, but lets not pretend it's a single sided affair. :Smile_Default:

 

Matt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,205
[IRNBN]
Members
3,523 posts
10,423 battles
1 minute ago, Wolcott said:

Nyet comrade, you must be referring to this Borodino! :Smile_trollface:

No, I'm referring to this Borodino-class Slava.

Any more stupid statements?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,115
Alpha Tester
2,552 posts
15 hours ago, TF77 said:

No, I'm referring to this Borodino-class Slava.

Any more stupid statements?

A topic made almost three years ago by another forum user. No model, no annoucement from WG about the ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,847
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
24,800 posts
3,895 battles
40 minutes ago, mobryan said:

Well, there is remembering it, and then there is rubbing your opponents face in it a century later.

I'm on Japan's side in this, but lets not pretend it's a single sided affair. :Smile_Default:

 

Matt

Is that really any different from Americans gloating about Midway though?

 

Any country is gonna venerate their victories. It's normal.

Edited by KiyoSenkan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,445 posts
7,009 battles
13 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

Is that really any different from Americans gloating about Midway though?

 

Any country is gonna venerate their victories. It's normal.

I'm looking forward to the photo op between American and Japanese dignitaries in front of a portrait of MacArthur or Nimitz, then, or seeing the next bilateral U.S. - U.K. treaty signed at Yorktown.

I like rivalries, I enjoy the hell out of them, but the Japan-Russia one seems to have another layer of mutual salt. It's fun to watch, but it's hardly a one sided "Russian are sore losers" affair. Japan goes out of it's way to poke the bear, and I think that is awesome.

 

Matt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×