Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
IronMike11C4O

Great White Fleet= Brain dead on WGing

50 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
438 posts
202 battles

Is anyone alive at the wheel at WGing? Great White Fleet, who came up with this braindead event? Why for the love of Christ have I been at this game for over 4 years and they still cant tailor weekend missions to, ya know ships that were actually apart of the GWF? This is dumb and another of the many reasons I went from 5K random games a year to 200 and little to no money spent. FOUR YEARS of non-sensical dumb.

  • Cool 4
  • Confused 6
  • Boring 10

Share this post


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

Are there any Great White Fleet Vessels in game? I thought it was all american pre-dreadnoughts and none of the american versions are in game.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,655
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
15,738 posts
21 minutes ago, IronMike11C4O said:

Is anyone alive at the wheel at WGing? Great White Fleet, who came up with this braindead event? Why for the love of Christ have I been at this game for over 4 years and they still cant tailor weekend missions to, ya know ships that were actually apart of the GWF? This is dumb and another of the many reasons I went from 5K random games a year to 200 and little to no money spent. FOUR YEARS of non-sensical dumb.

Um, OK..  what ships in WOWS would you have restricted this to? 

By name, list the ships.

 

  • Funny 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,184
[A-D-F]
Members
2,092 posts
7,603 battles
6 minutes ago, KilljoyCutter said:

Um, OK..  what ships in WOWS would you have restricted this to? 

By name, list the ships.

LOL!!  Cue Jeopardy theme.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,639
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
8,664 posts
14,760 battles

St. Louis only missions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,375
[R-F]
Members
1,787 posts
10,858 battles
35 minutes ago, _RC1138 said:

Are there any Great White Fleet Vessels in game? I thought it was all american pre-dreadnoughts and none of the american versions are in game.

You're correct.  If WG wanted to add another tier 2 battleship besides Mikasa to the game, the Connecticut or Virginia class ships would probably be appropriate, and then the Great White Fleet would be represented.  I don't see a lot of screaming from the fanbase for another sub-20 knot Pre-Dreadnought to seal club tier II's in, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,179
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
1 minute ago, Brhinosaurus said:

You're correct.  If WG wanted to add another tier 2 battleship besides Mikasa to the game, the Connecticut or Virginia class ships would probably be appropriate, and then the Great White Fleet would be represented.  I don't see a lot of screaming from the fanbase for another sub-20 knot Pre-Dreadnought to seal club tier II's in, though.

I mean I want a Lord Nelson in the game, although much like Mikasa I'd only use it in CoOp. Frankly, I'd like to see 'negative' tiers that unlock down to say, HMS Warrier/Gloire era.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,708
[WDS]
[WDS]
Members
3,566 posts
11,180 battles
37 minutes ago, Captain_Slattery said:

Free stuff.  :cap_like:

This ^^^^^ 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,683
[PVE]
Members
6,177 posts
22,432 battles
1 hour ago, IronMike11C4O said:

Is anyone alive at the wheel at WGing? Great White Fleet, who came up with this braindead event? Why for the love of Christ have I been at this game for over 4 years and they still cant tailor weekend missions to, ya know ships that were actually apart of the GWF? This is dumb and another of the many reasons I went from 5K random games a year to 200 and little to no money spent. FOUR YEARS of non-sensical dumb.

IKR...like for the Ovetchkin (sp) commander event they didn't make us use any of the historically accurate ships from the infamous international WWII hockey tournament.

Get it together WG.

Edited by IfYouSeeKhaos
  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,847
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
24,800 posts
3,895 battles
29 minutes ago, _RC1138 said:

I mean I want a Lord Nelson in the game, although much like Mikasa I'd only use it in CoOp. Frankly, I'd like to see 'negative' tiers that unlock down to say, HMS Warrier/Gloire era.

And if you go far enough...

Tier -10 only consists of CSS Virginia and USS Monitor.

At least until they add the -10 Russian one that's way better somehow. Maybe Novgorod.

Edited by KiyoSenkan
  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,134
[ARS]
Beta Testers
4,641 posts
5,000 battles
3 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

And if you go far enough...

Tier -10 only consists of CSS Virginia and USS Monitor.

At least until they add the -10 Russian one that's way better somehow. Maybe Novgorod.

Warrior and Gloire predate Monitor and Merrimack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,847
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
24,800 posts
3,895 battles
Just now, Helstrem said:

Warrior and Gloire predate Monitor and Merrimack.

I guess I defaulted to the Monitor as the first "all-steel" ironclad (Also the first rotating gun turret!) and Virginia as her quintessential foe.

Isn't Warrior just a standard tallship with iron plates on the sides and a large number of rather stationary side-mounted cannons?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
799
[HELLS]
Members
2,664 posts
27,212 battles
8 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

And if you go far enough...

Tier -10 only consists of CSS Virginia and USS Monitor.

At least until they add the -10 Russian one that's way better somehow. Maybe Novgorod.

Popovka!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,179
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
11 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

Tier -10 only consists of CSS Virginia and USS Monitor.

HMS Warrior and French Cruiser Gloire are actually older than the Monitor and the Merrimack; launched in 1859/1860 and 1862/1862 respectively. The USN was a bit behind, although obviously the turret addition on Monitor was a great leap forward.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,847
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
24,800 posts
3,895 battles
2 minutes ago, _RC1138 said:

HMS Warrior and French Cruiser Gloire are actually older than the Monitor and the Merrimack; launched in 1859/1860 and 1862/1862 respectively. The USN was a bit behind, although obviously the turret addition on Monitor was a great leap forward.

After trying to look it up to see what it looked like-- You guys must be talking about La Gloire, an 1860s Ironclad battleship.

LaGloirePhotograph.jpg

And here's HMS Warrior, just because

hms-warrior-1860.jpg

 

While I do respect these ships (I knew about Warrior, La Gloire is new to me and p.cool) I don't consider tallships to be in the same category as ironclads like Monitor or Virginia/Merrimack.

587b29d2bdd4f9f9f1b8982b6f4e2785.png

hxCXP.jpg

These are really where the aesthetic of the "modern navy" originated, with the complete omission of masts and sails.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,179
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
18 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

Isn't Warrior just a standard tallship with iron plates on the sides and a large number of rather stationary side-mounted cannons?

No she's an all Iron hull.

 

5 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

After trying to look it up to see what it looked like-- You guys must be talking about La Gloire, an 1860s Ironclad battleship.

LaGloirePhotograph.jpg

And here's HMS Warrior, just because

hms-warrior-1860.jpg

 

While I do respect these ships (I knew about Warrior, La Gloire is new to me and p.cool) I don't consider tallships to be in the same category as ironclads like Monitor or Virginia/Merrimack.

587b29d2bdd4f9f9f1b8982b6f4e2785.png

hxCXP.jpg

These are really where the aesthetic of the "modern navy" originated, with the complete omission of masts and sails.

Gloire caused Warrior to exist. Gloire was a classic 'Iron Clad' in the same vain as USS Virginia/Merrimack, HMS Warrior was the Royal Navy's response, and was not an Iron Clad (wooden hulled, iron plates nailed/bolted to the surface) but the first true Iron Hulled Warship. She had wooden baking to her armour (thought to work as a shock absorber at the time) as was the trend leading even past 'modern' Pre-Dreadnough battleships such as HMS Devastation, but her hull was 100% iron plate. As far as I am aware she is the first and original Iron Hulled Steam Warship, and the 2nd of all Iron Hulled steam ships. She was not just a tallship with iron plating. She wasn't even strictly a tallship: her sails were rarely if ever used (but the Admiralty at the time was loathe to give up sales completely; even some Pre-Dreadnoughts had them): she was a screw propeller ship as her primary mode of operation.

Edited by _RC1138

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,847
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
24,800 posts
3,895 battles
5 minutes ago, _RC1138 said:

She was not just a tallship with iron plating. She wasn't even strictly a tallship: her sails were rarely if ever used (but the Admiralty at the time was loathe to give up sales completely; even some Pre-Dreadnoughts had them): she was a screw propeller ship as her primary mode of operation.

I seem to recall a documentary claiming that they used sails for moving between operational areas or ports, and the engines/screws to maneuver during combat/training. Probably to save fuel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,179
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
10 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

I seem to recall a documentary claiming that they used sails for moving between operational areas or ports, and the engines/screws to maneuver during combat/training. Probably to save fuel.

Within home waters, prior to ~1868, yes, that was the custom, because the Coal reserves in Northern Ireland and Wales had not been opened (discovered). After 1868 or so, coal became cheaper than rigging sails themselves, and the first mastless ships started to exist. So for example the Devastation class, ordered in 1867, launched in 1869, had no masts and was the first true modern Warship:

l2702_002.jpgk7bed1r81ei11.png?width=960&crop=smart&a

This is pretty much to original Battleship/Armoured Cruiser in so far as appearance, layout, and style, with sufficient freeboard and stores to cross oceans. The americans did not build on their turret design until a little later, with the British beating them to it with HMS Bellerophone in 1866 (first ocean going turret ship) and the French with Redoutable. IIRC the americans didn't have a turret ship ocean going until the 1880's and stuck with en echelon layouts until the late 1880's.

Edited by _RC1138

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,053
[ARGSY]
Members
20,158 posts
14,340 battles
9 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

And here's HMS Warrior, just because

It's amazing. A HUNDRED AND SIXTY YEARS LATER, she is still there.  Where is Monitor? Where is Gloire?

(HMS Victory is also preserved, but she's there because she fought the quintessential, decisive age-of-sail sea battle as the winning side's flagship. Oddly enough, the winning flagship at the quintessential decisive age-of-STEAM sea battle between surface ships alone - Tsushima Strait - also still exists. And by an interesting coincidence, all three ships - Victory, Warrior, Mikasa - are British-built.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,053
[ARGSY]
Members
20,158 posts
14,340 battles
4 minutes ago, _RC1138 said:

This is pretty much to original Battleship/Armoured Cruiser in so far as appearance, layout, and style, with sufficient freeboard and stores to cross oceans.

That last picture looks like it's straight off the pages of The (Metal) Fighting Ship in the Royal Navy by E.H.H. Archibald.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,179
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
3 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

And by an interesting coincidence, all three ships - Victory, Warrior, Mikasa - are British-built.)

It's really not a coincidence....

Also USS Monitor, sorta, still exists:

monitor6_big.jpg

They raised her turret a few years back.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


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

 Where is Monitor?

Sunk off the coast of North Carolina.

Sinking is a thing that sometimes happens to ships that see combat. Isn't that right, Hood?

7 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

Where is Gloire?

Scrapped in 1883.

A thing that also sometimes happens to military vessels regardless of their service history. Isn't that right, Warspite?

7 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

 And by an interesting coincidence, all three ships - Victory, Warrior, Mikasa - are British-built.

You're really reaching to try and claim that  only England takes care of its things, huh?

We're not the ones that ruined Royal Sovereign, okay? Stop blaming America for that. Those guys ruined USS Milwaukee too, you know.

Edited by KiyoSenkan
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
304
[WOLFC]
Members
488 posts
6,422 battles
2 minutes ago, _RC1138 said:

It's really not a coincidence....

Also USS Monitor, sorta, still exists:

monitor6_big.jpg

They raised her turret a few years back.

I remember reading about it when they raised the turret. For anyone else curious, here's a link with more info.

https://monitor.noaa.gov/shipwrecks/uss_monitor.html

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×