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

Many 'rest of world' ships are ripe for inclusion in WoWs

12 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

48
[KAG2]
Members
61 posts
15,751 battles

For a good while, I've longed to see more historical ships from the various lesser naval powers of the world instead of the constant flow of fake ships (looking at you, USSR.) Only WG knows where its players are located, but I've noticed what I'm sure are many players in Argentina, as well as a good number of Brazilians. I have a strong suspicion WG is leaving a lot of money on the table by ignoring South America. The transfer of ships from the RN and USN after WWII, among other things, meant that there was a fair number of ships around the world suitable for this game.

Argentinian players have one ship, the Nueve de Julio, which isn't very good. I haven't researched their naval history yet (I'm starting with somewhat smaller forces,) but I'm certain you could find more ships for Argentina. Again, I have no idea how many people in other South American countries are playing, but here's a fantastic example of a real ship you could include with minimal effort, because it's a variant of one that already is in the game. It's a variant in a meaningful way.

The last ship in the Fiji/Ceylon-class cruisers was the HMS Newfoundland, transferred to Peru and commissioned in 1959. Of course, we already have Fiji, and I saw INS Mysore in battle last night. Mysore is part of the first group, the Fiji cruisers. So INS Mysore isn't new content, unless you make fictitious changes from Fiji. HMS Newfoundland, later called BAP Almirante Grau then BAP Capitán Quiñones (which is what I'd propose to call it in game, since another ship later went by Almirante Grau,) in Peruvian service, was from the second group, the Ceylon cruisers. From Wikipedia, armament for the two groups:

 

Armament:

My interest in these smaller navies featuring mostly "hand-me-downs" is because I love 'world' stuff, like flags, maps, the Olympics and travel. I'd buy stuff because it's different, but the best reason to make it isn't for people like me. Make it for the people whose countries would be represented in the game. I wish I could claim it would be more profitable than more paper ships with absurd, gimmicky characteristics, but I don't know that. I do believe many of these ships don't require as much work as some others since they're from classes already in the game, and could be a "cash grab" that people actually like because it's something they actually want.

I've just started to look up naval histories, and would love to see the Indian Leander (Delhi,) Colombian Hallands (!!! but which traded the 57mm Bofors for another 1x2 120mm turret,) New Zealand's Leander, and a bunch of ex-USN destroyers that served in various countries. Ships from Europe (Netherlands, Sweden, etc.,) some of which may be suitable, also found their way into service with navies elsewhere. As I look at more navies, I think I'm going to find many WWII-era ships with post-war service that would make great mid-high tier content for WoWs. And that's just one era. The early 20th century likely contains many ships good for the low tiers, and some of them are somewhat "hidden" because they aren't, for example, "cruisers." Tier I "cruisers" already include a minelayer (Gryf,)  aviso/sloop/colonial ships (Bougainville, Black Swan, Eritrea,) and a gunboat (Hashidate.) I don't think anything in Tier I could properly be called a cruiser, so a review of history should find no shortage of combatant ships around the world which could be brought into Tier I. 

If WG wants to make some money (and we know they do) and bring in more players (and we know they do,) I hope they'll consider adding ships from countries including, but not limited to:

Argentina

Australia

Brazil

Canada

Chile

Greece

India (beyond the one in testing)

Iran

Mexico (1 Gearing)

Peru

Spain

Thailand (Naresuan-class CL never finished, but was more "real" than most USSR content in WoWs now)

Venezuela

 

I will be looking at naval histories of these countries and more, looking for potential content, not because anyone has asked me to, but because I enjoy it. And I hope we see more of this sort of content instead of more OP fantasy ships masquerading as the history of a bit player in WWII at sea.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,594
[PVE]
Members
10,587 posts
31,028 battles

Some ships they can just add but many they need to get permission from the prospective countries to do so (for legal reasons).

But legal reasons aside they donate money to the vets of the countries whenever they sell a premium (actual premiums anyway...not sure about FXP/coal ships...but cash sales get a donation) so they like to get permission before just out of respect.

Real world issues between Russia & England is why it took so long for RN ships to get introduced instead of them being in the game from the beginning.

No clue what's in the works from those South American countries but the Nuevo de Julio is an indication that at least Argentina is on board...hopefully they will be able to get enough other SA countries on board to allow for a full line in the future.

Paper ships don't bother me because Yamato would be rather lonely at T10 w/out them but more real premiums means more donations to vets so I'm all for it...for all nations.

BTW...taking care of their own is why there's a proliferation of RU paper ships in their tree so the few real RU ships can be used for premiums...which is understandable so their own get more donations...& as they have full access to concept blueprints it's why there are so many more RU paper than any other country...because there's more source material to work with.

As for the OP part... let's just chalk that up to "creative license".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,198
[WOLF5]
Supertester
5,240 posts
4,507 battles

WG is pretty obviously aware of the SA playerbase, there's been a strong push recently of new SA items in game. They're coming.

The issue with many of these smaller countries is that they rarely have unique designs. They are usually ships that were bought or designed by major countries, and so are effectively clones of ships that already exist. The Commonwealth is the perfect example, lots of great historical ships, but almost all of them are classes that are already in the RN tech tree. There's only so many times you can gimmick out the same ship to make it different. While WG does sometimes take the paper ships too far IMO it's understandable why they'd go with new paper designs over just copy pasting a new nationality on an old hull.
 

5 minutes ago, Glarus said:

Argentina

Some very old BB designs, then old USN and RN ships

5 minutes ago, Glarus said:

Australia

RN part 2

5 minutes ago, Glarus said:

Brazil

same as argentina

5 minutes ago, Glarus said:

Canada

RN part 3

5 minutes ago, Glarus said:

Chile

see brazil

5 minutes ago, Glarus said:

Greece

Uh, a couple of South Carolina's I think, and then some old USN and RN DDs

5 minutes ago, Glarus said:

India (beyond the one in testing)

RN part 4

5 minutes ago, Glarus said:

Iran

You're kidding right?

5 minutes ago, Glarus said:

Mexico (1 Gearing)

 USN DDs part 2

5 minutes ago, Glarus said:

Peru

see brazil

5 minutes ago, Glarus said:

Spain

Well the USN kind of removed their entire Navy around 1898 and they didn't get around to rebuilding it until after WWII, which means for the period this game covers the spanish didn't really have any ships.

5 minutes ago, Glarus said:

Thailand (Naresuan-class CL never finished, but was more "real" than most USSR content in WoWs now)

No idea, but probably mostly based off of RN and RU designs

5 minutes ago, Glarus said:

Venezuela

See rest of SA.

It's not a matter of lack of interest, it's more a matter of at this point in the game there are actually very few unique actually built ship designs left.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,167
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
9,312 posts
18,626 battles

Regarding Mysore, she was a group 1 Fiji but was refitted to be a 3 turret ship to save weight, a pretty common fate of British Town and Fiji class survivors, and even a couple of Leander's and County's. 

So a 3 turret Fiji, which is basically a Ceylon is coming as Mysore. I believe Delhi was also promised at the same time Mysore was revealed to be planned.

There are some issues with ships being low tier. WG doesn't like low tiers, hence the last 2 lines out have been T8+ and the Italian battleships aren't getting a T3. There have been few low tier premiums for a while, just line freebies for the most part. 

There are some unique and higher tier designs out there, but few and far between. I don't have much interest in 50 export-Fletchers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,693
[FOXEH]
Alpha Tester
6,885 posts
21,234 battles

WG said they were adding Brazil next year for pan-America. its going to be a BB line. and a cruiser line for Europe(mix of Dutch, Austrian, Swedish and a few others) and Lastly Indian units for the commonwealth tree.:fish_book:

 

oh and maybe subs too!:Smile_hiding:

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38,928
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
27,528 posts
26,254 battles
Spoiler

and a cruiser line for Europe(mix of Dutch, Austrian, Swedish and a few others)

Where has WG said this?

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
832
[-Y-]
Members
843 posts
61 battles
39 minutes ago, AJTP89 said:

. There's only so many times you can gimmick out the same ship to make it different.

they seem to have no issue with multiple variants of USN ships (often paper designs or pure fiction), nor a lack of creative modelling to (re)invent Soviet (paper) ones. 

I think the reason is much simpler, they will naturally prioritize models and developement which they think will attract the largest share of customers. 

Belfast 43 is an example of budget saver development, zero effort required. There are many variants of the Town classes, with significant differences between them, not least the bloody obvious HMS Sheffield.

Mysore is an example of developing an emergent customer market, (long overdue), which simply isn't a major priority for WG, and so has had to wait until now. I doubt WG sees it as a major source of revenue! Thankfully we will see INS Mysore very soon.

Edited by hateboat
  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,043
[SALTY]
Members
8,929 posts
17,820 battles
1 hour ago, hateboat said:

Belfast 43 is an example of budget saver development, zero effort required. There are many variants of the Town classes, with significant differences between them, not least the bloody obvious HMS Sheffield.

Agreed.  I'd rather see (at minimum) different ships of a class than just a different year model of the same ship.

The annual differentiation between ships like West Virginia and Belfast just seems like shameless name equity exploitation.  Wait, that's because it is.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48
[KAG2]
Members
61 posts
15,751 battles
4 hours ago, hateboat said:

they seem to have no issue with multiple variants of USN ships (often paper designs or pure fiction), nor a lack of creative modelling to (re)invent Soviet (paper) ones. 

I think the reason is much simpler, they will naturally prioritize models and developement which they think will attract the largest share of customers. 

Belfast 43 is an example of budget saver development, zero effort required. There are many variants of the Town classes, with significant differences between them, not least the bloody obvious HMS Sheffield.

Mysore is an example of developing an emergent customer market, (long overdue), which simply isn't a major priority for WG, and so has had to wait until now. I doubt WG sees it as a major source of revenue! Thankfully we will see INS Mysore very soon.

I appreciate AJTP89's input, but don't necessarily agree that "copies" are a bad thing. We already have a bunch of ships that are variants (US DDs to Taiwan, for example,) fantasy near-copies (Bajie) or exact copies (the Black Friday ships.) I guess my point is that in adding many of these ships from classes already in the game, there is very little development to do, but money to be made from players who now don't have something that flies their country's flag.

Spain - I was looking here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_retired_Spanish_Navy_ships and this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Republican_Navy and without researching the classes, see what may be a lot of potential content.

Iran - 1 x Battle-class DD, 2 x Sumner-class DD

Thailand - From Wikipedia ("Etna-class cruiser (1941)") - Italian-made, launched in 1941 and 1942, scuttled by the Italians in '43. As originally designed they had 3x2 152mm guns, AA guns and torps (no further info.)

For all countries, whether they got much (or any) use out of ships they had really isn't an issue. Once you introduce fake ships, there is no bar to clear for any ships. Port queens are still more real than 80-year-old designs found in a drawer in some former Soviet design bureau.

Mofton, thanks! I didn't know Mysore was converted to the Ceylon configuration. If anyone at WG actually did say "should we add India or Peru?" (since the Pan-America and Commonwealth groups are available for expansion,) then it could have been a decision based on who plays and what markets they'd like to push into. And neither of those are things into which I have insight. I'm happy to see India join the game, and did wonder whether it was being planned since we got those camos.

Since history or the lack thereof is no obstacle to development of new content, another idea to target/satisfy different markets is to create fantasy ships for more countries, using the names of real ships that don't quite fit into the game. Some ships in the game now sport names of real but unsuitable ships.

Regarding permission, I don't know what permission WG would need to reference history. I believe some countries claim to control use of national symbols, but I don't know that it's enforceable in any meaningful way. Flags of countries are used in commercial publications and products all the time.

My worry at this point in the game seems to go in the opposite direction from "but this is just stuff we already have." My concern is that once you've added all the historical oddities like Kitakami, the need to add things that are "new" requires creating things that are increasingly absurd. What lies beyond the Georgia? What will be needed to stomp Shikishima? How can we get stronger AA on a DD than Halland's without going beyond 1950s guns? Looking just at the development of new ships in the game, the options are to continue to push the envelope, or expand what you have. Ridiculous can be fun (I love my Georgia and Halland,) but such things can attract as many haters as followers.

I definitely understand the Soviet bias in what ships they decide to create. If this was an American game, I'd expect the lineups to look different. And access to schematics is a perfectly good explanation. I'm grateful for what we have in the game, and look forward to what they conjure up for us in the future!

Edited by Glarus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,594
[PVE]
Members
10,587 posts
31,028 battles

@Glarus...Regarding permissions...

Just as 1 example...some ships (like Missouri) are museum ships that sell merchandise for that ship in their gift shops...you might be able to use their models if you are not charging for them (or maybe not... don't know the actual laws specifically in regards to that) but when you sell their models for profit w/out permission it breaches on copyrights...in some countries anyway...not all countries copyright laws are the same.

Just to treat all nation's equally...regardless of laws...& to keep the peace (don't want a nation w/out copyrights getting offended that the nation's w/copyrights are getting paid while they're not...could cause backlash...even if just bad PR) they get permission for all before they add sellable content to the game.

Plus they respect all that served & wish to be able to donate no matter what side they fought on (or even if they didn't fight in the world wars...they're sailors still served in other conflicts...or at least protected their borders if they never were in an actual conflict).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×