Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Jason86

When are the german battleships being released

26 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,373
[INTEL]
Members
3,265 posts
6,618 battles

WG just releasing Russian cruisers today - check

 

Asks about release of Battleships same day  - check

 

Asks in the cruiser forums - check

 

Asks in the Russian cruiser forums - check

Edited by CapnCappy
  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,287
[WG-CC]
-Members-, Members
9,101 posts
8,050 battles

Man stay patient ship development takes time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
522
[IN3PT]
Beta Testers
1,703 posts
6,511 battles

when are they releasing the german battleships an are they going to most likely use

 

Word has it we'll see them in August (there's a big European gaming thing called GAMESCON around that date, kinda like an E3)

 

as for ships, probably something like this:

 

3: Nassau

4: Kaiser

5: Konig

6: Baden 

7: possibly Scharnhorst, possibly L20a

8: Bismarck

9: H 39

10: H-41

 

check this out:

 

http://worldofwarships.com/en/news/common/wows-2016-plans-submarines/

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
485
[-BWS]
Beta Testers
1,896 posts
15,111 battles

They will release them as soon as the Kremlin tells them too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
862
[KNTAI]
[KNTAI]
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
3,176 posts
8,222 battles

Why are you asking about German battleships in the Russian cruiser forum?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,455
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
3,985 posts
2,373 battles

Word has it we'll see them in August (there's a big European gaming thing called GAMESCON around that date, kinda like an E3)

 

as for ships, probably something like this:

 

3: Nassau

4: Kaiser

5: Konig

6: Baden 

7: possibly Scharnhorst, possibly L20a

8: Bismarck

9: H 39

10: H-41

 

check this out:

 

http://worldofwarships.com/en/news/common/wows-2016-plans-submarines/

 

Only productive answer in this entire thread, would +1 it if I had any.:medal:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43
[MPIRE]
Alpha Tester
186 posts
9,948 battles

I'm driving German Battleships right now; you're not?  That's odd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,596
[-KIA-]
Banned
9,382 posts
29,124 battles

3: Nassau

4: Kaiser

5: Konig

6: Baden 

7: possibly Scharnhorst, possibly L20a

8: Bismarck

9: H 39

10: H-41

Wasn't Bayern the lead ship of the T6 class of dreadnoughts?  I get that Baden served a more significant role as High Seas Fleet flagship, but Bayern was the only one of the two to see combat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
522
[IN3PT]
Beta Testers
1,703 posts
6,511 battles

Wasn't Bayern the lead ship of the T6 class of dreadnoughts?  I get that Baden served a more significant role as High Seas Fleet flagship, but Bayern was the only one of the two to see combat.

 

You're absolutely right, got my wires crossed, I do that to Maryland and Tennessee all the time too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts

They literally just came out with a new tree, development (quality development) will take time and effort, so be patient, rushing content always leads to half-finished modes, and games, so please, wait. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
92 posts
1,843 battles

 

Word has it we'll see them in August (there's a big European gaming thing called GAMESCON around that date, kinda like an E3)

 

as for ships, probably something like this:

 

3: Nassau

4: Kaiser

5: Konig

6: Baden 

7: possibly Scharnhorst, possibly L20a

8: Bismarck

9: H 39

10: H-41

 

I mostly agree with that tree except for the L20a

 

In fact, I would modify the tree to:

3: Nassau

4: Helgoland

5: Kaiser

6: Konig 

7: Baden/Bayern

8: Bismarck

9: H 39

10: H-41

 

The Helgoland class dreadnoughts could just have inferior soft stats compared to the Kaiser class dreadnoughts, in addition to their significantly weaker armor...

 

On a related topic I would make a Battlecruiser tree here:

 

3:  Von der Tann

4:  Moltke

5:  Seydlitz

6:  Derfflinger

7:  Mackensen

8:  Ersatz Yorck

9:  Scharnhorst

10: O-Project

 

Given the reduced gun calibres of each ship, in comparison to their battleship competitors at each tier, maybe the battlecruisers could be more of a bridging ship between Heavy Cruisers and Battleships, much like how the new Moskva seems to appear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
522
[IN3PT]
Beta Testers
1,703 posts
6,511 battles

 

I mostly agree with that tree except for the L20a

 

In fact, I would modify the tree to:

3: Nassau

4: Helgoland

5: Kaiser

6: Konig 

7: Baden/Bayern

8: Bismarck

9: H 39

10: H-41

 

The Helgoland class dreadnoughts could just have inferior soft stats compared to the Kaiser class dreadnoughts, in addition to their significantly weaker armor...

 

 

The trouble with Helgoland is that it's basically another tier 3 BB design, maybe a 3.5 but it's no good at tier 4. 

 

Then you have the trouble of pushing the whole rest of the line up places where it doesn't belong.

 

Bayern compares quite nicely with New Mexico, Queen Elizabeth/R-class and Fuso, It'd be completely outmatched by Colorado, Nelson and Nagato.

 

L20a is the German design that "fits" with the last generation of super dreadnoughts (Colorado, Nagato, NelRod), squeezing Helgoland into to tier 4, then unfairly up-tiering the rest of the German line until Bismarck seems to be an unnecessary cruelty all to avoid a "paper" ship that otherwise perfectly fits in the game's current progression.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
92 posts
1,843 battles

 

The trouble with Helgoland is that it's basically another tier 3 BB design, maybe a 3.5 but it's no good at tier 4. 

 

Then you have the trouble of pushing the whole rest of the line up places where it doesn't belong.

 

Bayern compares quite nicely with New Mexico, Queen Elizabeth/R-class and Fuso, It'd be completely outmatched by Colorado, Nelson and Nagato.

 

L20a is the German design that "fits" with the last generation of super dreadnoughts (Colorado, Nagato, NelRod), squeezing Helgoland into to tier 4, then unfairly up-tiering the rest of the German line until Bismarck seems to be an unnecessary cruelty all to avoid a "paper" ship that otherwise perfectly fits in the game's current progression.

 

 

 

The problem with the L20a is that there's is a picture floating around the forums of the L20a being another tier 10...

 

Maybe Helgoland could be the tier 3 instead then?  Bear in mind that soft stats also come into play.  The trouble is that the Helgoland has both more guns and larger calibre guns than the Nassau.  It's essentially a prototype Kaiser.  It also had increased armour, handling, and speed to its predecessor.

 

As for the tree increase, unless the Bismarck is going to be listed as a tier 6 or 7, it too would fall into a similar situation as the aforementioned ships in your reply.  You must remember the Imperial German Navy design philosophy at the time: they generally had smaller guns than their direct competitors.  It would be no different in the tree here.

 

Nassau 12x 11" guns (only 8 can make a broadside at a time) vs South Carolina 8x 12" guns

Helgoland 12x 12" guns (only 8 can make a broadside at a time) vs Wyoming 12x 12" guns

Kaiser 10x 12" guns (only 8 can make a broadside at some times) vs New York 10x 12" guns

Konig 10x 12" guns vs New Mexico 12x 14" guns - Konig actually has more armor

Bayern 8x 15" guns vs Colorado 8x 16" guns - Bayern has comparable armor

Bismarck 8x 15" guns vs North Carolina 9x 16" guns - technically speaking, this is even more unfair

H-39 8x 16" guns vs Iowa 9x 16" guns - relatively more even

H-41 8x 17" guns vs Montana 12x 16" guns - relatively even

 

I put El_Judarino's response first since he wasn't being a smartass in his replies.  Now for the moron:

scharnhost in the BC tree lol

O-class at tier 10 rofl

 

Maybe you are selectively blind.  Did you completely miss the sentences after that tree?  Also the Scharnhorst has always been interchangeably referred to as both a Light Battleship AND a Battlecruiser...

 

A battlecruiser is not a battleship, rather it seems the best way to reflect this is to have glass cannons OR high RoF medium calibre; true, if you look at the potential battlecruisers as merely battleships with a different name, then yes the placements seem ludicrous.  According to navweaps, the 16"/50 of the Iowa/Montana class battleships had a projected RoF of 2rpm.  The 281mm 11" guns of the Scharnhorst had a projected RoF of 3.5rpm.  Most tier 10 cruisers have a 6rpm RoF on their 8" guns.  Thus, the medium level weaponry seems to fit a median in both calibre and RoF.  I imagine future some Battlecruiser trees will also reflect this characteristic.

Edited by slayer6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
522
[IN3PT]
Beta Testers
1,703 posts
6,511 battles

 

The problem with the L20a is that there's is a picture floating around the forums of the L20a being another tier 10...

 

 

I'm having trouble imagining a world where the L20a is a tier 10 vessel... Can't we just declare that picture... the product of an over fertile imagination? 

 

As for Scharnhorst's status as a battle cruiser, assuming the WG doesn't invent a whole new type of ship (that would likely introduce all manner of balance issues), I figure they'll keep treating them as BBs as far as game mechanics go. 

 

Either way, I think it fits very well at tier 7, regardless of what you call it. 

 

I'm curious how WG will handle Battlecruisers past tier 7. Currently, it would balance well to have BC and BB lines running parallel up through tier 7 (speed vs armor) and then merging at tier 8 where fast battleships become the norm. It does, conveniently cut out a lot of paper ships, though that does leave one missing out on some of the cool British drawings for battlecruisers after Hood. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
376
[S_E_A]
Beta Testers
2,709 posts
4,566 battles

IMO, the if Lesta doesn't have time to release both BB and BC(CC) lines at once, and wants to do a mixed line just to tick, we have all the famous BBs of German navy with their initial release, Scharnhorst wouldn't be too out of place in T7. Faster than both, thicker max thickness armor belt (14in on Scharn vs 12 in on Nagato and 13.5 on the Colorado), DPM oriented, and deck mounted torps.

 

If the 11 in guns stock are anemic, WG throws in the proposed 15 in upgrade on the B hull. 

 

The distinction between Battlecruiser and BB in WoWs has been blurred quite a bit. with the efficacy of angling (in game), they are far less squishy than they are. That's not to say I wouldn't mind a RN tree separated initially between the Dreads and battlecruisers

Edited by byronicasian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
92 posts
1,843 battles

I added some further edits to my previous post.

 

Chances are, that when more nations and trees are added, a series of big class patches would be applied to even things out.

 

Also might I suggest that one of the forum moderators move this thread into the German Cruiser forum for the time being?

Edited by slayer6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
92 posts
1,843 battles
On 3/26/2016 at 9:31 PM, Ditos said:

scharnhost in the BC tree lol

O-class at tier 10 rofl

I couldn't resist coming back to this post I made years ago...

The Siegfried might not be tier 10, but at tier 9 it's a pretty close estimation, especially since it is practically an O-Class battlecruiser...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×