#GiveArizonatorplaunchers

[scruffycavetroll]

#ddlivesdon'tmatter

 

/sign

[Czevak]

[Fog_Heavy_Cruiser_Chokai]

*Insertpoundsignhere*No

[scruffycavetroll]

 

how about yes...it had them. 

[INoCU]

 

how about yes...it had them. 

 

If they weren't swivel launchers then no. Otherwise yes because free broadsides are always a good thing for me. 

[scruffycavetroll]

 

If they weren't swivel launchers then no. Otherwise yes because free broadsides are always a good thing for me. 

 

see, at least you can see something good about it having them. 

[LubzinNJ]

 

how about yes...it had them. 

 

They were submerged torpedo tubes. You know what exists below that shiny water you see in the game? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. So you want them to expand the maps and create an entire underwater environment for a pair of torpedo tubes that you won't even be able to aim? Um no.

[Guest]

 

how about yes...it had them. 

Wargaming strictly stated that underwater torpedoes will not be added, and it will remain so. 

[scruffycavetroll]

Wargaming strictly stated that underwater torpedoes will not be added, and it will remain so. 

 

then they just pop up to the surface like others. 

 

no biggie. 

 

BUT....I'll let this go as someone answered in the other thread that they were removed in a refit, and we know that these ships are in their final state, so that said, the movement died before it started.  

[USMarine]

So did the Emden, but they were under the waterline (just like the USS Arizona); therefore, preventing them from being in the game.

 

http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/39a.htm

[Rissien]

 

They were submerged torpedo tubes. You know what exists below that shiny water you see in the game? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. So you want them to expand the maps and create an entire underwater environment for a pair of torpedo tubes that you won't even be able to aim? Um no.

 

The ships are fully modeled and torps are under the water so this argument has no value. I believe they mentioned not wanting underwater torp launchers because would be unable to damage/destroy them like you can the deck mounted ones.

[scruffycavetroll]

 

The ships are fully modeled and torps are under the water so this argument has no value. I believe they mentioned not wanting underwater torp launchers because would be unable to damage/destroy them like you can the deck mounted ones.

 

 

That makes sense but at the same time props are underwater, HE shot at the rear of ships can damage / impair props...why make these any different?

[BURN_Miner]

 

how about yes...it had them. 

 

So... Doesn't mean it should, I'm sure WG will do just fine by the ship. USN BB's, for the most part, are good/great brawlers to begin with in the game.

[Rissien]

Its not the rudder and props themselves getting damaged but the control rooms.

[scruffycavetroll]

Its not the rudder and props themselves getting damaged but the control rooms.

 

wouldn't there be a room that had to load the rear launcher then or was it a one shot deal that was remote?

 

nonetheless...this is making me sad. This and the Tirpitz should have a baby. 

 

Mod, feel free to close / delete / lock

 

The movement never had a chance...poor lil guy. 

[goldeagle1123]

#notorpsfortheclone

[1nv4d3rZ1m]

#notorpsfortheclone

 

Except its not a clone, its actually a slightly less refined version of the NM hull with the guns from the Texas. 

[goldeagle1123]

 

Except its not a clone, its actually a slightly less refined version of the NM hull with the guns from the Texas.

 

If the Chu-Nu Kai in WoT is called a clone, Arizona can be safely called a clone. The differences are less tan negligible.

[SeanPwnery]

The more you read about what type of below-the-waterline launchers it had, the less appealing they are... slow, single-fire rearward facing, speed requirement needed to blow them through the tube...

 

They're not like the Tirpitz-type above deck launchers... there's no spread, there's no use for it. Kind of a shame, but honestly nothing of value is being lost either.

[goldeagle1123]

The more you read about what type of below-the-waterline launchers it had, the less appealing they are... slow, single-fire rearward facing, speed requirement needed to blow them through the tube...

 

They're not like the Tirpitz-type above deck launchers... there's no spread, there's no use for it. Kind of a shame, but honestly nothing of value is being lost either.

 

Every single battleship of that era had these. It's even like these were exclusive to the Arizona.

[scruffycavetroll]

The more you read about what type of below-the-waterline launchers it had, the less appealing they are... slow, single-fire rearward facing, speed requirement needed to blow them through the tube...

 

They're not like the Tirpitz-type above deck launchers... there's no spread, there's no use for it. Kind of a shame, but honestly nothing of value is being lost either.

 

I put your handle right up there with Show-me-your-cits

[1nv4d3rZ1m]

 

If the Chu-Nu Kai in WoT is called a clone, Arizona can be safely called a clone. The differences are less tan negligible.

 

The Chi Nu Kai has the same guns, the same tank, the same everything aside from radio range. It is a clone. 

 

The Arizona is from a different class than the NM with different guns, different AA, and a different Hull. Aside from looking the same they are actually very different ships. The guns reload slower and penetrate significantly less armor, are slower, they do less damage. Saying that the differences is negligible is simply wrong. 

 

Just because you dont like USN ships does not mean you have to push you incorrect opinion on others. 

[Kitsunelegend]

 

The Chi Nu Kai has the same guns, the same tank, the same everything aside from radio range. It is a clone. 

 

The Arizona is from a different class than the NM with different guns, different AA, and a different Hull. Aside from looking the same they are actually very different ships. The guns reload slower and penetrate significantly less armor, are slower, they do less damage. Saying that the differences is negligible is simply wrong. 

 

Just because you dont like USN ships does not mean you have to push you incorrect opinion on others. 

 

But they DONT look the same either.

 

Arizona's turrets are completely different shaped (more rounded as apposed to the more sharp angled of NM's) Very different super structure, teh Arizona has those oh so sexy tripod mast while the NM...well, doesn't, and even the bow itself is rounded on the Arizona while the NM's is pointed.

 

Combine both those facts and the possible stats, its very safe to say that the Arizona is not anywhere near a clone of the NM.

 

And this is also not even taking the fact that the Arizona is a Pennsylvania class and the New Mexico is well, a New Mexico class into account either...

[EmperorMaxwell]

As long as Arizona goes Boom! At the mere mention of Dive Bombers, I could care less if it has Torps. At least 200% chance of Detonation when attacked by DBs.