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

Yukon in the Armory and Premium Shop

45 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,132
[FOXY]
Members
2,572 posts
7,766 battles
8 minutes ago, jamesi said:

So ... do i need a Canadian KGV?

Not just a KGV, a worse KGV in like..every aspect.

  • Cool 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
339
[PVE]
Members
540 posts
20,849 battles

I'm Canadian and I have no desire to buy this fantasy ship.

How about real Commonwealth ships?

The third largest navy in WW2 needs a tech tree 

  • Cool 5
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37
[TCWNN]
Beta Testers
115 posts
8,737 battles
19 minutes ago, commando_brian said:

I'm Canadian and I have no desire to buy this fantasy ship.

How about real Commonwealth ships?

The third largest navy in WW2 needs a tech tree 

Third largest navy but how many were actually built in Canada? (Serious question) since many were hand me downs from US and UK

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
262
[_BDA_]
Members
618 posts
9,797 battles
14 minutes ago, Copperhead550 said:

Third largest navy but how many were actually built in Canada? (Serious question) since many were hand me downs from US and UK

Doesn't matter as long as they are actual ships and not paper tigers.  UK torps on an old flush deck?  Sounds good to me.

Added:

For example, the US provided 7 Wicks and Clemson class destroyers, the UK provided something like 35 Letter  and Town class.  Then there are the frigates (River class) and corvettes (Flower and Castle classes).

Edited by michael_zahnle
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,383
[GWG]
Members
7,740 posts
14,774 battles
1 minute ago, Copperhead550 said:

Third largest navy but how many were actually built in Canada? (Serious question) since many were hand me downs from US and UK

Commonwealth is not just Canada. 
This is all over the world, and even includes 'Colony' US paper ships fantasizing of no 1776 Rebellion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,100
[KWF]
Members
6,572 posts
7,191 battles
5 minutes ago, Copperhead550 said:

Third largest navy but how many were actually built in Canada? (Serious question) since many were hand me downs from US and UK

By that argument the Pan Asian line shouldn't exist.

You got New Zealand, Australia, Canada, India to name a few of the important ones and represent a Commonwealth tree.

Edited by warheart1992
  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
151
[OMH]
Members
156 posts
4,805 battles

Wargaming loves slapping people in the face with crap like this, they don't listen to anyone, they think what they do is always right and never wrong, that's no way to run a game.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37
[TCWNN]
Beta Testers
115 posts
8,737 battles
3 minutes ago, warheart1992 said:

By that argument the Pan Asian line shouldn't exist.

You got New Zealand, Australia, Canada, India to name a few of the important ones and represent a Commonwealth tree.

I just asked how many were built in Canada not that they shouldn’t be represented lmbo  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
151
[OMH]
Members
156 posts
4,805 battles
1 minute ago, Itsj_p said:

Wargaming loves slapping people in the face with crap like this, they don't listen to anyone, they think what they do is always right and never wrong, that's no way to develop a game.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
156
[WOLF6]
Members
255 posts
9,710 battles

Wow, I kind of thought this one was going to be FXP... guess they really have given up on that concept. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,100
[KWF]
Members
6,572 posts
7,191 battles
5 minutes ago, Copperhead550 said:

I just asked how many were built in Canada not that they shouldn’t be represented lmbo  

Ok my bad then, apologies.

From the Canadian War Museum:

https://www.warmuseum.ca/cwm/exhibitions/newspapers/canadawar/shipping_e.html

"More than 126,000 men and women were employed. In all, the shipyards built 4,047 naval vessels, most of them landing craft but including over 300 anti-submarine warships, among them 4 Tribal class destroyers, and 410 cargo ships. At its wartime peak in September 1943, the industry was able to deliver the ten-thousand-tonne SS Fort Romaine in a stunning 58 days from the start of construction."

Edited by warheart1992
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37
[TCWNN]
Beta Testers
115 posts
8,737 battles
1 minute ago, warheart1992 said:

Ok my bad then, apologies.

https://www.warmuseum.ca/cwm/exhibitions/newspapers/canadawar/shipping_e.html

"More than 126,000 men and women were employed. In all, the shipyards built 4,047 naval vessels, most of them landing craft but including over 300 anti-submarine warships, among them 4 Tribal class destroyers, and 410 cargo ships. At its wartime peak in September 1943, the industry was able to deliver the ten-thousand-tonne SS Fort Romaine in a stunning 58 days from the start of construction."

Thank you 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
339
[PVE]
Members
540 posts
20,849 battles
1 hour ago, Copperhead550 said:

Third largest navy but how many were actually built in Canada? (Serious question) since many were hand me downs from US and UK

What does that matter ? How does the Leander play like the Perth? It doesn't ! 

They may look the same but; the play style is totally different 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37
[TCWNN]
Beta Testers
115 posts
8,737 battles
11 minutes ago, commando_brian said:

What does that matter ? How does the Leander play like the Perth? It doesn't ! 

They may look the same but; the play style is totally different 

Hey I played them both the same way as secondary builds and enjoy it ;) even the Chinese version of the Leander 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18,095
[ARGSY]
Members
25,150 posts
19,146 battles
11 minutes ago, Copperhead550 said:

even the Chinese version of the Leander 

Huang He is an Arethusa-class cruiser, not a Leander. Not even a modified Leander (some of them lost X turret late in the war to gain weight and space for AA and other stuff. The Arethusas were designed and built with three twin turrets; the Leanders with four.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
262
[_BDA_]
Members
618 posts
9,797 battles

Possible Canadian destroyer line... yes, it has holes, but it is based on ships already in the game.

II   

III  RMCS  Columbia (Wicks Class)

IV  RMCS Buxton (Clemson Class)

V  RMCS Skeena (A-Class, Acasta)

VI  RMCS Ottawa (G-Class, Gallant)

VII  

VIII  RMCS Cayuga (Tribal Class)

IX  

X  

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37
[TCWNN]
Beta Testers
115 posts
8,737 battles
41 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

Huang He is an Arethusa-class cruiser, not a Leander. Not even a modified Leander (some of them lost X turret late in the war to gain weight and space for AA and other stuff. The Arethusas were designed and built with three twin turrets; the Leanders with four.

True, but long ago when she first came out WG did slip up calling her a Leander-class :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
969
[MELON]
Members
965 posts
2,817 battles

No interest in getting something like this. Would much prefer real Canadian and other commonwealth ships like hmcs ontario

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18,095
[ARGSY]
Members
25,150 posts
19,146 battles
17 minutes ago, michael_zahnle said:

Possible Canadian destroyer line... yes, it has holes, but it is based on ships already in the game.

II   

III  RMCS  Columbia (Wicks Class)

IV  RMCS Buxton (Clemson Class)

V  RMCS Skeena (A-Class, Acasta)

VI  RMCS Ottawa (G-Class, Gallant)

VII  

VIII  RMCS Cayuga (Tribal Class)

IX  

X  

Tier 2 - HMCS Patriot (Thornycroft M class)

Tier 7 - HMCS Huron would fit, although as a sister of the Haida they'd have to find something to differentiate her from the premium ship. Maybe Algonquin (1940's V-class), though she might need soft-stat changes to her guns to make her competitive with only four.

Cayuga would have to keep the full four twin main turrets, mimicking Cossack at the same tier, but that just makes modelling easier. A point of separation from Cossack might be to give her DP capability for the main armament.

Tiers 9 and 10 are difficult, as there's a large gap between the war-era DDs and the later ones which replace them. They all have an AA armament built around missiles, and are unsuited for the game.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
497
[CRF]
Members
1,081 posts
9,410 battles
3 hours ago, warheart1992 said:

Ok my bad then, apologies.

From the Canadian War Museum:

https://www.warmuseum.ca/cwm/exhibitions/newspapers/canadawar/shipping_e.html

"More than 126,000 men and women were employed. In all, the shipyards built 4,047 naval vessels, most of them landing craft but including over 300 anti-submarine warships, among them 4 Tribal class destroyers, and 410 cargo ships. At its wartime peak in September 1943, the industry was able to deliver the ten-thousand-tonne SS Fort Romaine in a stunning 58 days from the start of construction."

Really sad to see the state of Canadian shipbuilding these days.  They build a fair amount of small aluminum boats, and they struggle with the steel government ship projects (tho about the same in the US), but all their non-government steel ships from 80-ft tugs to BC ferries are built overseas.  Very sad.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
377
[AZUR1]
Members
258 posts
5,435 battles

I don't know how WG can design such a ship that no one want to buy?

Worse than tech-tree ship, equip with a low 50% XP camo.... What's the reason to buy it??

Edited by Lancelot0001
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14
[WOLF7]
Members
33 posts
5,683 battles

I feel some urge to buy Yukon as I've seen a couple of fairly positive reviews (and besides I'm Canadian). I heard it needs a different play style from other BB's. More dynamic, "hit and run", was the way Carbine Carlito called it. Given some of the novelty ships coming out (hybrids, Dutch with air strikes) this ship does feel more mundane in comparison, but seems to be strong in heals and encourages a non-sniping play style. I'm hoping it's better then people think.

And to be honest, we never had BB's so Yukon is pure fantasy. That is a bit disappointing. Canada was a very significant "small ship" navy that was focused on ASW and DD engagements in WW2 and the Cold War. Personally, since subs are coming I'd love to see a Canadian DD line that is strong against subs and air attacks. That would be historically more accurate, and we already have (or had) Haida to start us off.

 

Edit: having just read Little White Mouse's review and the circumstances of Yukon's creation I choose not to buy this ship.

Edited by CoffeeandChaos
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×