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

Tired of paper ships

76 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

65
[CSN]
Members
18 posts

I guess the people running this thing don't care as long as the money is flowing -but the constant sight of ships in the game that never left the drawing board, or were cancelled - is getting tiresome. There is no point in playing when you constantly see stupid ships like Montana, Ohio, or Sovetsky Soyuz-class battleships.   

I mean the Soviet fantasy ships were cancelled because Soviet industry was to inept to make them in the first place.

I wish there was a "Historic" option where I didn't have to see this crap again.

 

  • Cool 8
  • Funny 3
  • Boring 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,493 posts
10,830 battles

image.jpeg.744dab697deee246b9bbdc5a22fc4da3.jpeg

wargaming arent going to be skipping your historical ships, they understand how important history is to a large number of gamers i remember hearing from them they are awaiting detailed blueprints for alot of ships but mainly this is a game that requires new content and content would dry up quick if they only released historical ships.

i like the new content real or made up, keeps the game ticking over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,082
[TSG4B]
Volunteer Moderator
2,919 posts
15,321 battles

Its not my game, Its WG's game. WG can do whatever they like to their game coz them OWNED the game

I am not complaining about paper ships, because the more the better, Gotta' catch them ALL!

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
823
[PISD]
Members
1,277 posts
5,261 battles

Well, paper ships are more an effect of their priority. They focus more on tier 8 and above, both form premium and to some extend line ships (either with late split like the Russian, or line meh until the higher tier like the Italian and French dd). And the higher tier are basically post war design with few exception, making the ships at those tier more often concept than anything (since only the US had the wealth to build those late “big guns” ships).

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,840
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
26,420 posts
14,165 battles
58 minutes ago, Jan_van_Galen said:

I guess the people running this thing don't care as long as the money is flowing -but the constant sight of ships in the game that never left the drawing board, or were cancelled - is getting tiresome. There is no point in playing when you constantly see stupid ships like Montana, Ohio, or Sovetsky Soyuz-class battleships.   

 

I mean the Soviet fantasy ships were cancelled because Soviet industry was to inept to make them in the first place.

 

I wish there was a "Historic" option where I didn't have to see this crap again.

 

Ships that were cancelled after being ordered did leave the drawing board with a full engineering workup, save your anger for the proposals which only had preliminary engineering work  and pure fantasy ships. There are so many ships that did exist or were at least ordered that I would like to see fewer never ordered or fantasy ships but the focus is on the higher tiers where there are fewer ships that are viable for those tiers.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,922
[KSC]
Clan Supertest Coordinator
5,123 posts
7,975 battles
1 hour ago, Jan_van_Galen said:

I wish there was a "Historic" option where I didn't have to see this crap again.

Wait let me get this straight....

You can load into battle in a Des Moines....on the same team as a Yamato and Bismarck, while fighting an Iowa and Edinburgh on the enemy team, while your ship zips around with arcade physics in a game where none of the basic mechanics (concealment, HP, DCP, heals, radar, fire, floods, damage models, etc) have any bearing on reality, and battles are decided in quick 20 minute intervals based in part on which team managed to sit in a random patch of water long enough get the most points.....but the existence of ships that never sailed in real life is what pushes things over the edge for you?

Edited by yashma
  • Cool 7
  • Funny 6
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,763 posts
93 battles
5 minutes ago, yashma said:

Wait let me get this straight....

You can load into battle in a Des Moines....on the same team as a Yamato and Bismarck, while fighting an Iowa and Edinburgh on the enemy team, while your ship zips around with arcade physics in a game where none of the basic mechanics (concealment, HP, DCP, heals, radar, fire, floods, damage models, etc) have any bearing on reality, and battles are decided in quick 20 minute intervals based in part on which team managed to sit in a random patch of water long enough get the most points.....but the existence of ships that never sailed in real life is what pushes things over the edge for you?

This exactly.

 

Pretty funny how these "historical advocates" seem to ignore most of the arcade aspects of the game just to push their "Historical Ships Only" banner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,673
[PVE]
Members
6,149 posts
22,432 battles
2 hours ago, Jan_van_Galen said:

I guess the people running this thing don't care as long as the money is flowing -but the constant sight of ships in the game that never left the drawing board, or were cancelled - is getting tiresome. There is no point in playing when you constantly see stupid ships like Montana, Ohio, or Sovetsky Soyuz-class battleships.   

 

I mean the Soviet fantasy ships were cancelled because Soviet industry was to inept to make them in the first place.

 

I wish there was a "Historic" option where I didn't have to see this crap again.

 

What actually built real life ships (please include cruisers/DDs/BBs/& CVs for each nation) would you balance out the Yamato with at T10?

Edited by IfYouSeeKhaos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,197
[SALVO]
Members
24,792 posts
25,856 battles
2 hours ago, Jan_van_Galen said:

I guess the people running this thing don't care as long as the money is flowing -but the constant sight of ships in the game that never left the drawing board, or were cancelled - is getting tiresome. There is no point in playing when you constantly see stupid ships like Montana, Ohio, or Sovetsky Soyuz-class battleships.   

 

I mean the Soviet fantasy ships were cancelled because Soviet industry was to inept to make them in the first place.

 

I wish there was a "Historic" option where I didn't have to see this crap again.

 

There's a HUGE difference to me between some design that WG pulls out of their behind and something like the Montana which was actually fully designed and ORDERED by the US Navy, only to be cancelled because the Navy decided that carriers had a higher priority in their limited number of large ship yards.

And frankly, I find uber-purists to be rather annoying.  There is nothing "stupid" about the Montana!!!   Or a number of other designs that were completely legit but were never constructed for various reasons.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,197
[SALVO]
Members
24,792 posts
25,856 battles
1 hour ago, RyuuohD_NA said:

This exactly.

 

Pretty funny how these "historical advocates" seem to ignore most of the arcade aspects of the game just to push their "Historical Ships Only" banner.

Hey, I like some historicity.  But it's people who call this game an "arcade game" who have no ability to see that it's not an all or nothing, 0 or 1, situation.  Sometimes, things have to be simplified for time compressions.  But sometimes, some things have been done for thoroughly stupid reasons. The "reality" is that is entirely possible to emulate (not simulate) fairly realistic things in exceedingly simple ways.  But the all or nothing crowd seems incapable of understanding this, or downright refuses to see understand it.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,763 posts
93 battles
1 minute ago, DolphinPrincess said:

And the difference between a real and paper ship in a game is...

 

That's right, ABSOLUTLY NOTHING

"B-But muh American supremacy over fake Russian imaginary navy!!"

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Banned
627 posts
6 hours ago, Jan_van_Galen said:

I guess the people running this thing don't care as long as the money is flowing -but the constant sight of ships in the game that never left the drawing board, or were cancelled - is getting tiresome. There is no point in playing when you constantly see stupid ships like Montana, Ohio, or Sovetsky Soyuz-class battleships.   

 

I mean the Soviet fantasy ships were cancelled because Soviet industry was to inept to make them in the first place.

 

I wish there was a "Historic" option where I didn't have to see this crap again.

 

Then you wouldn't have half the game, most navies were small, so to make lines you have to use paper, deal with it and move along. 

You don't like paper? Don't play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Banned
627 posts
3 hours ago, IfYouSeeKhaos said:

What actually built real life ships (please include cruisers/DDs/BBs/& CVs for each nation) would you balance out the Yamato with at T10?

Midway class CV for the US, used to be the only thing that could kill a Yamato, back when it had the OG ship printer that would make Conqueror jelly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32,501
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
24,117 posts
18,970 battles

It's not going to change, so you need to make a choice. Accept it or move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1
[DC4UA]
Members
1 post
1,554 battles

Has there ever been an attempt to make a realism mod either by indies or WG?  i think it would be amazing to reenact the battle of jutland or maybe the coral sea.  Yes, it would be more of an exercise of history than a game, but I think there are more than a few nerds that would enjoy it.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[PRMUS]
Members
943 posts
2,312 battles
7 hours ago, BrushWolf said:

Ships that were cancelled after being ordered did leave the drawing board with a full engineering workup, save your anger for the proposals which only had preliminary engineering work  and pure fantasy ships. There are so many ships that did exist or were at least ordered that I would like to see fewer never ordered or fantasy ships but the focus is on the higher tiers where there are fewer ships that are viable for those tiers.

 

Yup this is my position. Bringing cancelled ships to life is historical and the issue is making stuff up out of thin air. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[PRMUS]
Members
943 posts
2,312 battles
1 hour ago, gasbag1970 said:

Has there ever been an attempt to make a realism mod either by indies or WG?  i think it would be amazing to reenact the battle of jutland or maybe the coral sea.  Yes, it would be more of an exercise of history than a game, but I think there are more than a few nerds that would enjoy it.

These should be the rotating handful of missions.

 

Imagine the rotation being Jutland, North Cape, Hunt for Bismarck etc?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,922
[KSC]
Clan Supertest Coordinator
5,123 posts
7,975 battles
6 hours ago, RyuuohD_NA said:

This exactly.

 

Pretty funny how these "historical advocates" seem to ignore most of the arcade aspects of the game just to push their "Historical Ships Only" banner.

I appreciate the nods to history wherever possible....but the inclusion of paper ships isn't even the tip of the iceberg as far as historical inaccuracies go. 

The Montana or Stalingrad being built and sailing is a far more realistic prospect than a ship having a magic HP bar and being able to instantly extinguish multiple raging fires in a split second while ramming into islands at full speed and suffering not even at scratch.  If anything, I actually really enjoy the inclusion of paper ships from an alternate history "what if" perspective. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
776
[LOU1]
Members
4,162 posts
12,052 battles

It hasn't been mentioned, but the ships without blueprints are designed by naval architects following the design principles in use by the country in question.  I know there are a cadre of players that have little respect for WG, but the organization does invest a lot of time and effort into the historical design aspect of the ships.  Personally, as a simulation player of long standing, I am glad WG makes changes based on playability in this game.

There is also the issue of whether WG can get permission to add a ship to the game and whether they can get access to the blueprints/drawings.  Oddly, there are still WWII ships that are classified.  Also, without "paper" ships there would be very few ships in WOWS.  Look at how many Omahas and Bensons - there are in the game.  Ships are expensive and not very many countries could/can afford to design and build them.

In the final analysis, WOWS is a game designed to be playable by a wide variety of players.  There are a few realistic simulator naval games - the problem is they have a very small following because realistic naval action is not really very engaging.  I guess the biggest issue is that nothing about (realistic) war is fun or enjoyable.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
188
[BBMOD]
Members
348 posts
5,767 battles

The USA made 98 Gearing class DDs during the war. Should WG introduce all of them into the game? And if they did, what would the point be?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
122
[ASRN]
Beta Testers
661 posts
6,278 battles

It is what it is.  If this were based on reality,  we'd be mostly driving Fletcher-class or Clemson-class DD's.  Hell, it'd be mostly USN anything-- SS,DD,CL,CA,BB, CV,.  As an American, even I would get bored of that real quick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×