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

I find it curious... (German v Russian ships)

45 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
111 posts
5,439 battles

Anyone else find it curious that a "ton" of players think that Russian paper ships are ruining the game and that they are going to quit (etc.), and yet I have heard almost no belly aching about the fact that WG released 3 paper German premium ships in one update? Why do you think that is? I have nothing against Russian or German ships, it just feels like there may be some double standards going on here...

  • Cool 2
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
  • Boring 3
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,225
[-ARP-]
[-ARP-]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
4,165 posts
4,371 battles
Just now, JimmyTheRealPirate said:

Anyone else find it curious that a "ton" of players think that Russian paper ships are ruining the game and that they are going to quit (etc.), and yet I have heard almost no belly aching about the fact that WG released 3 paper German premium ships in one update? Why do you think that is? I have nothing against Russian or German ships, it just feels like there may be some double standards going on here...

The community is sick and tired of WG releasing fantasy Russian Paper ships that are very strong and competitive and will pretty much always be in the meta in Clan Battles and Ranked games, while the 3 paper ships that WG released for Germany are all sub-par Paper Premiums compared to their same tier counterparts. Siegfried and Agir are not worth their prices and Odin should really just be placed in Tier 7.

Meanwhile the upcoming Russian Cruisers and the current Nevsky are all instant, competitive and extremely strong ships for their Tier and WG sees this as "fine".

~Hunter

  • Cool 17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
156
[_BDA_]
Members
301 posts
4,788 battles
3 minutes ago, JimmyTheRealPirate said:

Anyone else find it curious that a "ton" of players think that Russian paper ships are ruining the game and that they are going to quit (etc.), and yet I have heard almost no belly aching about the fact that WG released 3 paper German premium ships in one update? Why do you think that is? I have nothing against Russian or German ships, it just feels like there may be some double standards going on here...

Could it also be that the German ships were actual designs?  I seem to recall a USN cruiser that was designed but never built which led to an actual ship.  Phoenix and Omaha I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,225
[-ARP-]
[-ARP-]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
4,165 posts
4,371 battles
Just now, michael_zahnle said:

Could it also be that the German ships were actual designs?  I seem to recall a USN cruiser that was designed but never built which led to an actual ship.  Phoenix and Omaha I believe.

As far as I know, Phoenix is a fantasy ship with no real basis lol

 

~Hunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
111 posts
5,439 battles
2 minutes ago, Hunter_Steel said:

The community is sick and tired of WG releasing fantasy Russian Paper ships that are very strong and competitive and will pretty much always be in the meta in Clan Battles and Ranked games, while the 3 paper ships that WG released for Germany are all sub-par Paper Premiums compared to their same tier counterparts. Siegfried and Agir are not worth their prices and Odin should really just be placed in Tier 7.

Meanwhile the upcoming Russian Cruisers and the current Nevsky are all instant, competitive and extremely strong ships for their Tier and WG sees this as "fine".

~Hunter

So you don't think it really has to do with the paper ship aspect of these new releases, but with the strengths of the Russian ships? In which case why does it matter if its Russian? There are many newer releases that are exceptionally strong, but people are not saying they plan to leave the game because of those. (for example Venezia, somers, that t10 French steel BB that I can't spell, etc.).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
446
[NMKJT]
Members
2,674 posts
7,474 battles
1 minute ago, michael_zahnle said:

Could it also be that the German ships were actual designs?  I seem to recall a USN cruiser that was designed but never built which led to an actual ship.  Phoenix and Omaha I believe.

Some of the German paper ships were proposed designs, some are just zombies WG made up for the purpose of filling out the tech trees or making money off of premium sales. Russian navy has the same general theme. IIRC Kremlin is a proposed design but even VMF engineers knew the 457mm wasn't gonna work on that hull, just like how GK is some unholy combination of H-designs with a triple turret the DKM designers would never have gone for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
156
[_BDA_]
Members
301 posts
4,788 battles
2 minutes ago, Hunter_Steel said:

As far as I know, Phoenix is a fantasy ship with no real basis lol

 

~Hunter

Found this.

The Phoenix is based off of a 1917 scout cruiser proposal that was planned as the successor to the Chester class. They were designed to be fast, have good seaworthiness, and a top of the line observation and communication suite in order to serve as the "eyes" of battleship fleets. They were up-gunned and up-armored later in the project's development so that they could fill a destroyer pack leader role. Their comparatively high cost, as much as four destroyers, resulted in Congress flat out refusing to allocate money for their construction as they feared that they would become obsolete before construction would finish. Experience gained during the First World War proved the viability of a scout cruiser design and resulted in the plans being radically redesigned into the Omaha class.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,841
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
26,420 posts
14,165 battles
25 minutes ago, Hunter_Steel said:

As far as I know, Phoenix is a fantasy ship with no real basis lol

 

~Hunter

The Phoenix was a proposal that eventually became the Omaha. So technically a paper design but one that lead to a real ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,192
[SYN]
Members
5,877 posts
13,296 battles

I addressed this very issue in another thread.

On 6/14/2020 at 5:31 PM, Kuckoo said:

I suspect the argument isn't just that they (the Soviet line) have paper ships, but the outright number and proportion of them compared to other lines.

For the sake of brevity in the following compilation, "fictitious" ships include those that had only a keel laying or were only partially completed before being broken up or otherwise disposed of, those that only saw drafts, those that were merely proposed (an idea talked of and a simple drawing made to illustrate), or any other "projects" that never saw the light of day.  All navies had, and continue to have many such examples of each, not just the Soviets.

In the Soviet research tech tree:

  • 7 of 8 ships in the battleship line are fictitious
  • Of 12 ships in the cruiser line, including those in the upcoming split,  8 of them fictitious
  • Half of the 12 ships in the destroyer tech tree were built and in fairly good numbers in some cases, generous by Soviet tech tree standards
  • The Orlan at Tier one is fictitious

Not including carriers since the Soviet line has none (for now...), the Soviet researchable tech tree consists of 33 gunnery ships, tied for the most with the Royal Navy and Imperial Japanese lines, and even one more than the United States Navy line:

  • 9 of the 33 RN ships are fictitious
  • 7 of the 33 IJN ship are fictitious
  • 6 of the 32 USN ships are fictitious
  • 22 of the 33 VMF ships are fictitious

It's a similar story with Premium and Resource ships.  While the Soviet P/R line doesn't have as many ships as the Japanese and Americans, it has almost twice as many as the British, and it has the same number of fictional ships as those from the other three nations combined:

  • 2 of the 14 RN ships are fictitious
  • 5 of the 33 IJN ships are fictitious  (here things get a bit fuzzy since there are multiple special ships derived from fictional "characters" in anime - HSF, ARP, etc. - but those were based on ships that were built and saw service IRL, so those weren't counted as fictitious.  The five that are counted were ships that definitely were not built or saw service at any point)
  • 3 of the 32 USN ships are fictitious
  • 10 of the 25 VMF ships are fictitious

So, of the 58 Soviet ships counted here that are in the game, 32 of them are fictional.  A roughly 55% ratio.

All of this from a navy who, quite frankly, was a minor participant in period.  The Dutch Navy in and around the East Indies saw more action than the Soviet navy during WWII.

Does that mean people shouldn't play and enjoy the Soviet ships in the game?  Of course not.  You can bet I do.  I've been playing and enjoying Soviet cruisers a lot lately.  However, it is reasonable to question the credibility of such filler, especially when you consider there are other minor navies in the game - as well as some major ones - that are nowhere near as fleshed out as the Soviet lines.

 

 

Regarding in-game performance, an argument could be made about that of Soviet ships in the game compared to others.  Personally, I play Soviet cruisers far more often than German ones.  It's just easier to do well in them than in those from other lines.  All you have to do is sit back 15 or 16 kilometres and put rounds on target.  That's it.  Battleships burn endlessly, cruisers are shredded, even destroyers are torn up at those ranges.  Meanwhile, most have difficulty hitting me at all in return, especially when I'm kiting.

You can't miss with the guns WG has graced them with.  The Shchors in particular is overpowered in the gunnery department for a Tier VII cruiser.  Which is why I've been playing it as often as I have lately.  Even bought the perma-camo for it and retrained one of my 19-point captains for it.  Shchors is my "go to" boat now.

 

 

 

Edited by Kuckoo
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
472
[CLUMP]
Members
818 posts
1,165 battles

Right so can you explain this video then of Petropavlovsk :fish_book: Let be honest anything german is gimp right next to anything Russian in wargaming games that's a fact :Smile_popcorn:World of tanks  World of warplanes World of warships if it's Russian odds, are it's better than German counterparts :Smile_hiding: 

Edited by LastRemnant
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,922
[KSC]
Clan Supertest Coordinator
5,123 posts
7,981 battles
1 hour ago, JimmyTheRealPirate said:

So you don't think it really has to do with the paper ship aspect of these new releases, but with the strengths of the Russian ships? In which case why does it matter if its Russian? There are many newer releases that are exceptionally strong, but people are not saying they plan to leave the game because of those. (for example Venezia, somers, that t10 French steel BB that I can't spell, etc.).

Unpopular opinion...but the answer is simply the fact the community has its own biases stemming from the fact that the developers are Russian and are thus perceived to be biased in their own right....which creates a self fulfilling prophecy in which the community actively looks for any evidence to support their own preconceived notion of Russia bias while downplaying all counter examples.

 

*I think Soviet ships being paper, over powered, or over represented is a secondary factor as the community does not hold other nations to the same standard.  Just compare the community reaction to the initial announcement of the Ohio with the initial announcement of the Soviet cruiser split.  

  • Cool 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
483
[1IF]
Banned
436 posts
1,421 battles
1 hour ago, JimmyTheRealPirate said:

it just feels like there may be some double standards going on here...

There's a 'double standard' going on. We all know that (well, most do).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
798
[HELLS]
Members
2,662 posts
27,160 battles
54 minutes ago, Kuckoo said:

9 of the 33 RN ships are fictitious

Thunderer, Conqueror, Lion, Minotaur and Neptune are phonies. Cheshire and all the RN CA tech tree heavies from T7 toT10 are phonies. That makes 10 RN phonies, 9 of them in the tech trees. Those who claim Audacious as a phony don't know their RN history. She was renamed HMS Eagle during construction and the Audacious fit you see in the game was Eagle as originally built and commissioned, except for the screwed-up air group. Every other RN ship in the game, tech tree or premium, was real.

Everyone knows I am not a fan of paper ships, which is why I have never gone beyond Bismarck, never kept Amagi and Izumo, and never went beyond Mogami and Akizuki.Too much phony for this old guy's liking. Play what you want, I don't mind,  but I won't play them. My Soviet fleet is all historical and will stay that way.

We need the CV lines' odd numbered tier ships brought back with historical air groups for a change. CVs are not my favorites, but submarines even less so. With WG, you can never tell what's real and what's fake coming down the pipe...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,133
[ARS]
Beta Testers
4,629 posts
4,997 battles
2 hours ago, JimmyTheRealPirate said:

Anyone else find it curious that a "ton" of players think that Russian paper ships are ruining the game and that they are going to quit (etc.), and yet I have heard almost no belly aching about the fact that WG released 3 paper German premium ships in one update? Why do you think that is? I have nothing against Russian or German ships, it just feels like there may be some double standards going on here...

How many premium Russian cruisers are there in the game?  How many premium British cruisers in the game?  How many cruisers did Russia really have?  How many cruisers did the United Kingdom really have?  Do you see any disparity in how they are represented in WoWS?

 

(We still don't have a premium AP only Royal Navy CL to use as a trainer.  In fact the only premium British CL to have been added has been on the banned list for over two years, and that one is an HE spammer)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,407
[POP]
Members
2,846 posts
22,763 battles
6 hours ago, JimmyTheRealPirate said:

Anyone else find it curious that a "ton" of players think that Russian paper ships are ruining the game and that they are going to quit (etc.), and yet I have heard almost no belly aching about the fact that WG released 3 paper German premium ships in one update? Why do you think that is? I have nothing against Russian or German ships, it just feels like there may be some double standards going on here...

I have two Issues with PAPER ships:

1. To many in game at the expense of actual built ships, however in the case of tech trees its the best of a bad deal.

2. To many OP premium PAPER ships and even tech tree ones and who has the most in that category, take a wild guess who that is.

As for the 3 German ships they are sub par or average at best.

You talk of double standards, a French cruiser got nerf hammered two patches ago but a certain Russian BB just got a minor nerf, 1 of 3 I will say but minor none the less.

Not only that most of the " minor nerfs " did little in the way of reducing OPness.

Then a statement comes out that WG does not want go to extremes in one hit but gradually reduce effectiveness in ships that seem OP.

To late for the French ship though, I don't own either 

And that's just one of many cases.

Edited by tm63au
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
111 posts
5,439 battles
32 minutes ago, tm63au said:

I have two Issues with PAPER ships:

1. To many in game at the expense of actual built ships, however in the case of tech trees its the best of a bad deal.

2. To many OP premium PAPER ships and even tech tree ones and who has the most in that category, take wild guess who that is.

As for the 3 German ships  are  sub par  or average at best.

You talk of double standards, a French cruiser got nerf hammered two patches ago but a certain Russian BB just got a minor nerf 1 of 3 I will say but minor.

Not only that most of the " minor nerfs " did little in the way of reducing OPness.

Then a statement comes out that WG does not want go to extremes in one hit but gradually reduce effectiveness in ships that seem OP.

To late for the French ship though, I don't own either 

And that's just one of many cases.

Although I would agree the acceleration nerf to Henri was a bit much, that doesn't really have anything to do with the topic of the post. Which ships get nerfed/buffed and to what extent isn't relative to why people throw fits over paper ships in one nations line, but not for paper ships in another nations line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,870
[USCC2]
Members
6,060 posts
7 hours ago, Hunter_Steel said:

The community is sick and tired of WG releasing fantasy Russian Paper ships that are very strong and competitive and will pretty much always be in the meta in Clan Battles and Ranked games, while the 3 paper ships that WG released for Germany are all sub-par Paper Premiums compared to their same tier counterparts. Siegfried and Agir are not worth their prices and Odin should really just be placed in Tier 7.

Meanwhile the upcoming Russian Cruisers and the current Nevsky are all instant, competitive and extremely strong ships for their Tier and WG sees this as "fine".

~Hunter

I understand how many on the forums  may well be tired with paper ship releases - I would 'prefer' real ship releases as I think it is just better to remember real people and the real ships they served on - a tribute if you like.

But I do wish some would stop talking as if they understand the thoughts of 'the community'.

I am not sick and tired - this is a game, and whereas I'd prefer to honour real people/ships, it isn't an issue if paper ships are released (because in the end this is a game and so much of it does not represent IRL).

 

I also don't care if a particular nation is strong either, but considering all the OP ships removed from the game seem to represent a variety of nations, I don't feel there is a bias for Russian ships.

In regards to German ships, I also very much enjoy  my T61, Shiny Horse, Mainz, Tirpitz, and Z52. I am grinding the different German lines and find them to be enjoyable, they just seem dependable ships. 

I do understand some may be sick and tired of paper ships or perceived (or real?) bias, but the community includes everyone, not 'some'. :Smile_honoring:

 

 

Edited by _WaveRider_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
300
[5D3]
[5D3]
Members
505 posts
15,152 battles
3 hours ago, JimmyTheRealPirate said:

Anyone else find it curious that a "ton" of players think that Russian paper ships are ruining the game and that they are going to quit (etc.), and yet I have heard almost no belly aching about the fact that WG released 3 paper German premium ships in one update? Why do you think that is? I have nothing against Russian or German ships, it just feels like there may be some double standards going on here...

plus, german tech lines don't get alot of love so additions are nice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,673
[PVE]
Members
6,150 posts
22,432 battles
3 hours ago, Hunter_Steel said:

The community is sick and tired of WG releasing fantasy Russian Paper ships that are very strong and competitive and will pretty much always be in the meta in Clan Battles

They weren't even the meta this CB season.

1 IJN CV & 7 Venezias was THE meta for CBs.

The fact a few clans switched a couple Vens for Stalingrads didn't make it the meta as many other cruisers were also occasionally switched for a Ven or 2 but THE meta was just Vens & neither them or the IJN CV are Russian.

If you're going to speak for "the community" at least try not to let your bias show in the form of over exaggerated  incorrect data because a lot of people in the community are sick & tired of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
114
[BTH]
Members
319 posts
16,527 battles
4 hours ago, JimmyTheRealPirate said:

it just feels like there may be some double standards going on here...

We are not double standard -- we are anti (WG's) double standard :fish_viking:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,673
[PVE]
Members
6,150 posts
22,432 battles
3 hours ago, Kuckoo said:

I addressed this very issue in another thread.

Regarding in-game performance, an argument could be made about that of Soviet ships in the game compared to others.  Personally, I play Soviet cruisers far more often than German ones.  It's just easier to do well in them than in those from other lines.  All you have to do is sit back 15 or 16 kilometres and put rounds on target.  That's it.  Battleships burn endlessly, cruisers are shredded, even destroyers are torn up at those ranges.  Meanwhile, most have difficulty hitting me at all in return, especially when I'm kiting.

You can't miss with the guns WG has graced them with.  The Shchors in particular is overpowered in the gunnery department for a Tier VII cruiser.  Which is why I've been playing it as often as I have lately.  Even bought the perma-camo for it and retrained one of my 19-point captains for it.  Shchors is my "go to" boat now.

 

2 hours ago, tm63au said:

I have two Issues with PAPER ships:

1. To many in game at the expense of actual built ships, however in the case of tech trees its the best of a bad deal.

2. To many OP premium PAPER ships and even tech tree ones and who has the most in that category, take wild guess who that is.

As for the 3 German ships  are  sub par  or average at best.

You talk of double standards, a French cruiser got nerf hammered two patches ago but a certain Russian BB just got a minor nerf 1 of 3 I will say but minor.

Not only that most of the " minor nerfs " did little in the way of reducing OPness.

Then a statement comes out that WG does not want go to extremes in one hit but gradually reduce effectiveness in ships that seem OP.

To late for the French ship though, I don't own either 

And that's just one of many cases.

WG can't just use ship names w/out permission...ships have "copyrights" on their names & WG also donates money to vets of the countries every time they sell a premium.

But as for being able to get permission to use a certain nation's ship name in the game...guess which nation they have the easiest ability to get permission from :-)

  • Funny 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,192
[SYN]
Members
5,877 posts
13,296 battles
3 hours ago, GrandAdmiral_2016 said:

Thunderer, Conqueror, Lion, Minotaur and Neptune are phonies. Cheshire and all the RN CA tech tree heavies from T7 toT10 are phonies. That makes 10 RN phonies, 9 of them in the tech trees. Those who claim Audacious as a phony don't know their RN history. She was renamed HMS Eagle during construction and the Audacious fit you see in the game was Eagle as originally built and commissioned, except for the screwed-up air group. Every other RN ship in the game, tech tree or premium, was real.

This is correct.  Thank you.

Miscounted in my rush to post.

Edited by Kuckoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,086
[WMD]
Members
1,619 posts
9,753 battles
4 hours ago, JimmyTheRealPirate said:

Anyone else find it curious that a "ton" of players think that Russian paper ships are ruining the game and that they are going to quit (etc.), and yet I have heard almost no belly aching about the fact that WG released 3 paper German premium ships in one update? Why do you think that is? I have nothing against Russian or German ships, it just feels like there may be some double standards going on here...

One simple answer is that the Soviet navy was largely irrelevant until post WWII, adding more paper ships to an irrelevant navy is bound to draw some ire. 

If WG decided to make a paper Spanish CA line before Italian BBs people would likely be just as upset. The PE boats and RN CAs(which did have a lot of pushback) at least have mostly being build(PE), or being from a relevant navy(RN) going for them. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,809 posts
1,478 battles

If people are out rage over Russian Bias, they can always release submarines for a nice distraction.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
103 posts
2,727 battles
4 hours ago, LastRemnant said:

Right so can you explain this video then of Petropavlovsk :fish_book: Let be honest anything german is gimp right next to anything Russian in wargaming games that's a fact :Smile_popcorn:World of tanks  World of warplanes World of warships if it's Russian odds, are it's better than German counterparts :Smile_hiding: 

When I was dreaming that it was Halloween eve throwing out shells the size of freight trains with arcs like potato pancakes citadeling more in one salvo than anything from the KM would normally get in a game I thought this was hilariously funny.

 

Then I woke up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×