Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'premium'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Forum
    • English Speaking Forum
    • Deutschsprachige Community
    • Polska Społeczność
    • Česká a slovenská komunita
    • Communauté francophone
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Topluluk
    • Comunità Italiana
  • Mod Section
    • Rules, Announcements and General Discussion (English)
    • Modding Tutorials, Guides and Tools (English)
    • Interface Mods
    • Visual Mods
    • Sound Mods
    • Modpacks
    • Other Mods and Programs
    • Outdated Mods
    • Archive
  • Historical Section

Calendars

  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Found 344 results

  1. Hey allerseits, warum muss der Unterschied von Coop Gefechten und Zufalls Gefechten so groß sein? Habe nun schon Premium Zeit und Premium Schiffe gekauft, dazu noch Flaggen Pakete und Premium Tarnungen. Bringt aber alles nix echt enttäuschend so macht das keinen Spaß mehr. Im Coop zu gewinnen ist echt easy, aber gegen die Bots langweilig auf Dauer. Im Random kriegt man aber nur auf die Schnauze ohne die geringste Chance was zu reißen. Im DD durch ein Flugzeug im Cap aufgedeckt und sofort versenkt weil alle sofort auf einen ballern, ganz tolles Kino. Einnebeln beim wegfahren nutzlos, treffen trotzdem alle. Wozu dann Nebel? Also kein Geld mehr für WG, schade ist sonst echt ein geiles Game, aber so echt nur noch nervig.
  2. When I was searching for some warships-related information, I found a topic on the NA server by user Lert. I was immediately enthousiast about that idea. Since that link likely won't work unless you have an NA account as well (like I do), Lert gave me permission to place his message here for us on the EU server. All credits go to him, and I copied this straight from his message on NA (except for a typo in the title that I corrected): While I've talked about the Admiralen class before, that was always in general terms. I believe that to enhance the chance of someone at WG taking notice of a premium ship request, I should make it as specific as possible and narrow it down to a specific ship, give a synopsis about its service history, include as much information as possible and even give my view on how to implement her, with what features, at what tier and describe what play style she would offer. No small task. So without further ado, let's get down to the nitty gritty of it, and present HNLMS Witte de With: HNLMS Witte de With as commissioned. Witte de With was an Admiralen class destroyer which was laid down on 28 May 1927 at the shipyard of Fijenoord in Rotterdam and launched on 11 September 1928. The ship was commissioned on 20 February 1930. She is named after Witte Corneliszoon de With, a famous Dutch naval officer of the 17th century. Witte Corneliszoon de With, by Abraham van Westerveld She was typical Admiralen class of the second group, measuring just under 100m long and displacing 1666 metric tons at full load. She had three Yarrow type boilers and two Parson geared turbines driving two shafts. Her drive train produced 31000 HP which pushed her along at a modest 36 knots. There is little written down about Witte de With's service career, but what's there paints a picture as tragic as that of her seven sister ships of the Admiralenclass. There is especially little written down in public, easy-to-find internet archives about her first ten years of service, before WWII broke out. It's written that she visited Saigon along with her sistership van Galen and the Java class cruiser Sumatra, in 1935. It's said that Witte de With was present at the fleet days in Sumatra in 1936, along with sisterships van Galen and Piet Hein, and the Java class cruisers Java and Sumatra. Later that year both Java class cruisers and the Admiralen class destoyers Witte de With, Evertsen and Piet Hein made a fleet visit to Singapore, stopping along the way in the South China Sea for an exercise. So for the first ten years of her service Witte de With performed PR duties and exercises, projecting force and showing the Dutch navy's investment in various Pacific sea locations. But then war broke out. Some time during 1940 or 1941, Witte de With along with her sister van Ghent were equipped with ASDIC systems. But it was during the ill-fated battle of Java Sea that Witte de With took her modest place in history. It was during this engagement that HMS Exeter was crippled by Japanese fire, when a shell from Haguro exploded in her boiler room, knocking six of her boilers off-line. Witte de With was ordered to escort the stricken Exeter back to safety in Surabaya port. Several days later, while at sea, Witte de With's aging and outdated AA suite became her doom when she was attacked and bombed by Japanese aircraft, on may 1st, 1942. The most significant hit was a bomb to the forecastle, which crippled the ship. Afloat but crippled, and unable to affect open water repairs, the captain ordered her scuttled the next day. Close-up of the bridge and mid-section, drawing quite a crowd. So what would she look like in game? For the purposes of this thread, I'm going hog-wild with stats and consumables, though all within historical reason and precedence. I will explain why further down in this post. Tonnage: At 1666 metric tons full load, we get 10900 hitpoints. This puts her at around tier 4 or 5. However, I want to place her at tier 6, which means she'll have the lowest hitpoints in tier, even behind lightweights like Hatsuharu which boasts 11700 hitpoints fully upgraded. Armor: The 'armor' on this destroyer served purely to keep the crew inside while under maneuvers. Moving on ... Main armament: 4x single Siderius No. 4 120mm guns. These were license built copies of a Bofors design and fired a 24 kg HE shell at 900 mps. This is an excellent muzzle velocity and would give it very good ballistics over range and short time-to-target, for a 120mm gun. I believe these guns to be near as indistinguishable from the guns on the in-game Błyskawica, as they are both similar vintage Bofors designed 120mm guns with a 50 caliber barrel length, 900 mps muzzle velocity and a ~10 RPM ROF. Taking Błyskawica's numbers, we get to a HE shell with 1700 dmg and an 8.5% fire chance, and an AP shell with 2200 damage. If they really are as similar to Błyskawica's guns as I imagine them to be, they would likely inherit the Polish ship's sluggish 18s turn rate. Although she would outgun Japanese destroyers at tier, do not mistake Witte de With for a gunboat destroyer. With only four barrels and a 6 second reload, her gun battery is a back-up weapon system at best, suitable for harassing battleships at long range or finishing off wounded destroyers, at most. Their muzzle velocity would give them the ballistics to accurately place warheads on foreheads at range, but she'll never have sufficient shells in the air to seriously worry anyone who isn't a Japanese destroyer of equal tier or lower. Secondary / Auxilliary armament: 1x Siderius No. 7 75mm 4x 40mm Pom Pom 4x .50 Browning M2 When commissioned this was sufficient. However, at the mid stages of WWII, it no longer was. It's even questionable whether WG would make the 75mm a secondary or not, but even if they did, it wouldn't really be any DPS worth mentioning from a single gun with 8 RPM and a 6.5kg shell. The pom-poms would give about 22 dps at 2 km and the .50s about 15 dps at 1.2km. Celebratory fireworks to hail the arrival of angry airplanes. Torpedo armament: 2x triple 533mm tube setup. With six centerline tubes divided in two launchers of three barrels apiece, Witte de With is not a very powerful torpedo boat. To give her some teeth I say she would carry Błyskawica's British Mk 10*, which gives us a torpedo with 8km range, 57 knots speed and 14400 damage. This is a very modest torpedo for a very modest broadside alpha strike. Having the same number of tubes it's very likely these will reload in about the same 70s as on Błyskawica's torpedo setup. Although her torpedo battery is relatively more potent than her gun battery suite, I'd hesitate to call Witte de With a torpedo boat. Speed: As mentioned, 36 knots. This is on the low end for tier 6, beating only some of the Japanese destroyers like Fubuki and Shinonome. Concealment: This is, for tier 6, a tiny ship. She is roughly the same dimensions and displacement as a Minekaze class destroyer, and would likely carry very similar dispersion. Minekaze boasts a 6.2km surface detection range and 3.1km by-air detection range. With Witte de With being suggested a premium and thus coming with a premium camouflage standard, her concealment would likely be in the 6.0km range by surface, before captain skills are applied. "So, wait, no hitpoints, weak gun battery, very mediocre torpedo battery, why is this thing tier 6? Sounds like the perfect tier 5, to me!" Patience, patience. Yes, the ship based purely on its own merits is a shoe-in for tier 5. That's why in my tech tree proposal, that's where I would put her. However, remember where I mentioned that Witte de With and van Ghentreceived ASDIC some time during the early years of the war? This gives us historical precedence for a Hydroacoustic Search consumable. Plus, there's another neat trick the Admiralen could do .... That's right. A destroyer with a spotter plane, carried aft on a structure above the rearward torpedo mount. Consumables: We'll start by giving her the standard destroyer suite of consumables, being DCP, Smoke and Speed Boost, all standard versions. Since we're talking about Witte de With, we'll also give her a Spotter Plane with a single charge base, and Hydroacoustic Search with one or two charges base. This would give Witte de With the flexibility and vision control to challenge cap circles and provide forward scouting in a way no other destroyer in this game can. "Wait, back up a bit. Admiralen had a catapult?" Well, no. No catapult. The sea plane was carried on a structure above the rearward torpedo mount, and lowered in the water by a crane so it could take off. However, WG already has planes that historically landed in the water and were recovered by crane just flying into the ship and appearing back on the catapult, so it'd be a very small step in terms of mechanics and programming to have the plane take off from the mount as well. "So, why Witte de With in particular? There are other Admiralen that have as historical and tragic a story." Yes, there are. However, those are better suited for the tech tree. Since consumables like a spotter plane and hydro change the play style, I wanted to take her out of the tech tree and make her a premium. Witte de With and van Ghent were the only ones who received ASDIC, so they're the only two candidates for this up-tiered Admiralen premium, and I like the story of Witte de With more than that of van Ghent. Plus, she has ties with HMS Exeter, and I think it very likely that we'll see the latter in game at some point as well. "Alright. So what play style would Witte de With offer?" She'd be very stealthy with ok-ish mobility, so she'd be a decent cap contester. This is only strengthened by the presence of a spotter plane and hydro, allowing her to see for her team and light up targets from smoke, as well as dodge torpedoes heading towards her smoke screen. She'd be a high skill floor and high skill ceiling ship with decent torpedoes and usable gun battery backup to help fight her out of tight spots, but her primary role would be scouting and cap contesting. Her small size likely makes her very agile, too. She'd require a decent captain skill point investment to get the most out of her, with Super Intendent a must, as well as Expert Marksman, Concealment Expert and Advanced and Basic Firing Training to taste. She'd also benefit from Torpedo Armament Expertise to drop her already swift torpedo reload even further. Finally, Vigilance might be a worthwhile investment as with her concealment, Witte de With should always be up front. So, in short: Pros: - Historical ship, fought in in WWII - Ties with the RN, escorted HMS Exeter - Unique playstyle with spotter plane and / or hydro Cons: - Limited appeal (NL nation not in game) - Mid tier - Requires entirely new model researched and build "Hmmm. Limited appeal, NL nation not in game. That sounds like a problem." Although she has limited appeal on the NA server as a Dutch ship, a first Dutch premium would herald and generate interest for a full tech tree. There aren't many nations left not yet in the game that WG would implement as full nations with their own tree, and the Dutch have the potential for the potential for a DD tree line supplemented with only a few design proposals and a cruiser tech tree with a reasonable mix of historical vessels and design proposals. Having that first premium offer some new and unique gameplay will further help sell the ship and generate interest. "Wait, potential for a full Dutch DD and cruiser tech tree? What?" Yes. Even if WG would not consider adding a full Dutch tree (though I don't see why not, they're running out of other nations not-yet-in-the-game that could conceivably offer a full tree) there is still space for Witte de With in this game as precursor to a pan-european tree, which I hope would have a significant Dutch presence. She could occupy the Tier 6 destroyer premium spot, while Błyskawica sits at tier 7. "Wait, I thought you didn't like balancing ships by gimmick?" You're right, I don't. Normally. However, if a Dutch DD tree is going to be implemented, Admiralen is a shoe-in for tier 4 / 5 already and likely not get the spotter plane. I think it would be a complete waste of potential if no version of her was implemented with spotter plane, and the only way to realistically solve that is to implement a variant with. However, since this puts her above T5 category in terms of potential / performance, T6 premium is the only realistic place she could go. "Ok, but what would she cost, if implemented at T6?" Likely a very similar price to any of the existing premium T6 destroyers. Right now Monaghan is in the store for $25-ish. I'd wager Witte de With would cost somewhere around that too. Maybe a bit less, maybe a bit more, but no more than $30 for the base ship and a slot, without bundle. "What style of camouflage might she wear?" There are two options, really. First is flat gray with large, white 'WW' on the sides: Second is a blocky, light-and-dark-gray pattern: This picture though is likely not Witte de With. It's probably Evertsen, a sistership. however, it shows precedence for an Admiralen in camouflage, and thus I would consider it an option for Witte de With in this game. Personally I'm partial to the clean, light gray scheme with the large 'WW' on the sides, but that's just me. "How do you pronounce the name, Witte de With?" 'Wittuh duh Wit'. The 'h' is not considered, so the 'With' part is pronounced like 'wit' with a hard T. There is a slight emphasis on the first syllable of the name, and all syllables are spoken at reasonably quick pace, none linger. Thank you for taking the time to read this proposal, and please support a dutch inclusion into WoWS. We have Haida, there is a pan-American nation upcoming with Nueve de Julio, so it's about time the Dutch were considered as well. Thanks to @LittleWhiteMouse for helping me put this proposal together, and for coming up with a possible national flavor for Dutch destroyers: Personally, I really like this idea. It's new, it's fun to play, it's a national flavor and it actually has a small basis in history. Admiral Michiel de Ruyter had a whole fleet of shallow-draft ships built which gave them exceptional maneuverability and the ability to go where his adversaries couldn't, allowing him to outmaneuver his opponents and win decisive battles that way. Sources used: @Pigeon_of_War ------------------------------------------------- End quote. Again, not my idea, but an idea by NA user Lert, who gave me permission to post it here. I'm already enthousiast for this idea, and I'm curious what you think about it.
  3. Servus zusammen, da mit der Belfast ja der letzte/ einzige Premiumkreuzer der Briten weg gefallen ist hier meine Idee für einen Ersatz: Ja sie ist es, die HMS Cumberland. Schwerer Kreuzer der County Class, Subclass Kent. Daten siehe hier: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/County-class_cruiser https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Cumberland_(57) General: Price: Tier 7 Standart Premium Hit Points: 31.000 Standart Tier 7 203 mm L 50 Mk VIII. (4x2) Rate of Fire 4.62 shots/min. Reload Time 13 sec. Rotation Speed 6.5 deg./sec. 180 Degree Turn Time 27.69 sec. Firing Range 14.7 km. Maximum Dispersion 134 m. AP Shell 203 mm Maximum AP Shell Damage 4,600 Initial AP Shell Velocity 853 m./s. AP Shell Weight 118 kg. Secondary Armament #1 4 × QF 4-inch (102 mm) L/45 Mk.V guns in single mounts HA Mk.III . Firing Range 4.5 km. Rate of Fire 15 shots/min. Reload Time 4.0 sec. HE Shell 102 mm HE/ Maximum HE Shell Damage1,200 Initial HE Shell Velocity 657 m./s. Chance of Fire on Target Caused by HE Shell 9 % AA Defense 4 × QF 4-inch (102 mm) L/45 Mk.V guns in single mounts HA Mk.III 8 × QF 2-pounder (40 mm) L/39 Mk.VIII guns in quad mounts HA Mk.VII except Berwick; 16 in oct mounts Mk.VIII 8 × 0.5-inch (12.7 mm L/50) Mk.III machine guns in quad mounts Mk.I Torpedos 8 × 21-inch (533 mm) torpedoes in quad mounts 72 sec reload, 15,433 max damage, 8km range (Fiji stock Torps) Maneuverability Maximum Speed 31.5 knot Turning Circle Radius 680 m. Rudder Shift Time 9 sec. Concealment Surface Detectability Range 13.42 km. Air Detectability Range 8.5 km. Description: AP Shells only - typical british single shot torps possible Slot 1: Damage Control Party Slot 2: Repair Party Slot 3: Hydro (Fiji Type) Slot 4: Radar or Spotterplane or smoke or Catapultfighter Was haltet ihr von der Idee ? Als Vergleich musste die Indianapolis herhalten, mit entsprechender britischen Änderungen. Sorry für das blöde Aussehen, bekomme die Wiki einstellungen nicht raus.
  4. So, summer sale is here, and as I think Wargaming has done a good job, they deserve some duku for the dakka. After all, we play this game a lot, have so far spent nothing on it - and meanwhile we bought lots of games that end up in the corner of 'never to be seen again bin' after a few months. So, now summersale is here and WG gets a beer! I think best for me would be the Hood, I like the BBs (US and RN) and do OK in them, just the ehh... 'speed'... I like the RN cruisers too. So, if it goes on sale, I'm getting Hood. Could get an US BB but well... I hate CVs so that AA thing, I like see planes fall like flies. And them BBs aren't much speedy either until high tier. I often div with my son, he's pretty good (I think better than me). Ah well, dad is getting old a bit I guess. But while he doesnt really like the cruisers, he likes the DDs a lot. Mostly he likes the dakkadakka of the US branch. He likes IJN DDs as wel but we noticed that in higher tiers the BBS seem to sail less in straight lines (OK only a bit). Oh, and he hates those damn planes as well. His stats: Boat73. He plays a lot with his friends too (Argh disaster... LOL). As his friends do not play high tiers I thought T7 might be the best (perhaps he can save them form becoming cannon fodder). Also the ...eehh ...saltiness in higher tiers (plus the 'more thinking, less acting'... a lot less acting) does not really attract. Therefore, we think a (halfcruiser)BB for me, a DD for him. My guess is the combo Hood/Soms, but maybe you have even better ideas. EDIT: I saw that I could not reply - am I doing something wrong here? I need the advice, so please if I do something wrong - @moderators, a bit of help PLZ.
  5. Hi, I am struggling to finance all the ships I have researched by the time I got the experience to unlock them. Thus I figured I would like to buy a premium ship to speed things up vastly. My question is, what ship does earn the most credits in an average game ( I am not that great of a player ) when all factors such as shell-cost, repair-cost etc are considered? I lean to towards Alabama or Tirpitz however I am not set on any particular nation as this will be a ship ONLY to farm credits, the crew training aspect is secondary at best.
  6. Commandant navire Premium?

    Bonjour à tous. Peut-etre une question idiote, mais bon.... Je n'arrive pas à transférer mon commandant de l'Ishizuchi (JAP PREMIUM IV) vers un autre navire japonais sans devoir payer le cout de ré-entrainement... Mais, sauf à ce que j'aie mal compris, on n'a pas à payer ce cout quand cela concerne le commandant d'un navire Premium non?........ Merci pour vos éclairages. Fred
  7. Oi there you reading person or thing. Im a dirty casual wows player. I'd like to find a clan thats active on discord, and can help me learn this game, and will have alot of division's going into battles as i am sick of playing solo. I dont have a main class, i just really enjoy playing DD's (yes even in this really radar heavy meta). im not saying im really good at it, just saying i enjoy it :) The clan has to be active, and have a sence of humor! Kind regards, A dirty casual captain called MrGameMafia.
  8. techtree Premium rotation?

    I was just wondering when the premium ships in the tech tree which you can buy for dubloons will change. I really want the König Albert but spending 10 bucks on it when I have so many unused dubloons laying around seems stupid.
  9. Well it looks like the upcoming Pan-American premium cruiser Nueve de Julio was really famous for one thing, being a secret prison/concentration camp for political prisoners during the Dirty War in Argentina. People were kidnapped without court order and imprisoned on the cruiser. They were tortured and held in inhuman conditions onboard. @MrConway @Crysantos Can we please get an official statement about why WG has decided to implement this ship in WoWS? Sources: https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fjuiciobahiablanca.wordpress.com%2F2015%2F02%2F04%2Fnacidx-en-el-9-de-julio%2F&edit-text=&act=url https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fmemoria.telam.com.ar%2Fnoticia%2F-armada---2a--ronda-de-alegatos--con-descripcion-de-ccd_n5482
  10. Indianapolis 1750 EP

    Moin. Heute habe ich viel Spiele gespielt und dabei für 24 Std. ein Premium Status bekommen. Danach hatte ich ein Match gewonnen und habe mehr als 1750 Basis-EP verdient. Leider wurde mir das allerdings nicht für den Indianapolis Marathon "Gewinnen Sie ein Gefecht und verdienen Sie 1750 Basis-EP" angerechnet. Es war ein Zufallsgefecht und ich bin mit der Yorck gefahren. ein T7 Warum nicht??
  11. Witojcie, Jako, że Haida jest już dostępna w sprzedaży warto założyć wątek poświęcony temu, bądź co bądź, słynnemu kanadyjskiemu niszczycielowi klasy Tribal. Parametry są podane na Wikipedii, więc odsyłam do niej. Parametry Haidy. W skrócie: -bardzo dobre kamo, -"kroczący" dym, podobnie jak u Pertha, -hydro o krótkim zasięgu, ale wydłużonym działaniu; ponadto na osobnym slocie, -jeden aparat torpedowy z 4 rurami, możliwość odpalania torped pojedynczo, -6 dział o dobrych obrażeniach, ale fatalnych kątach ostrzału. Poniżej screen z alternatywnym kamuflażem. Zapraszam do dyskusji.
  12. Hire / Lease /Lend-lease Premium ships?

    Hi WOWs fans, and also to @MrConway here's an idea - it might have com up before, but I could not find anything in 'search'. How about RENTING/LEASING premium ships? The trouble is, choosing a ship to buy is pretty much a gamble. Personally I am doubting between he getting the Hood or the Warspite. Both seem likely candidates,. I enjoy big fat BBs and I also like the RN cruisers. Since they do not come much fatter than the Good Old Warspite... that is an option. And since the Hood is a faster but less armoured BB (it is more like a cruiser) would be eligible too. If I could try - say <E5 and have it 'lend-lease' for the weekend - I'd certainly try it. And then buy it if I like. They do that with cars too (and all other sorts of stuff). You rent/lease it for a certain amount,. And then after the rent/lease period you can buy it, receiving the already paid rent/lease as a discount. I have seen a few people that bought DD Gallant after the 'operation Dunkirk'. If we had the Hood in such an operation (I'm not much good at DDs...) I think you'd have had another sale. Well the ideal would of course be to have missions in which you'd get a ship (like the Gallant) and hope they buy it afterwards. But that would be a lot of work... not gonna happen... Maybe a 'rental package' would be good too - have acces to all premiums over the weekend, and after that buy any of the 'leased' premium ships, for a discount (the discount being the price what you paid for the weekend-rental). EDIT: you could, with the 'rental', have a voucher code for a discount on something to make it simpler. I know it would solve my decision - and it might help others. Also, if alreday paid the rent, they might buy a ship (or maybe more) while otherwise they would not gamble if they are not sure if they like it or not.
  13. Hallo... Ich habe heute versucht etwas Premium-Zeit als Geschenk zu kaufen. Ich gebe den Namen des Empfängers ein, der wird mir auch angezeigt und übernommen, dann setze ich den Haken und wähle dann die Zahlungsart und es passiert..... nix. Der Button sieht so aus als ob dieser Gedrückt werden würde, aber es kommt weder eine Bestätigung noch eine Fehlermeldung. Ist da derzeit die Seite defekt? Oder mach ich irgendwie einen Fehler? Wenn ich für mich etwas kaufe geht es ohne Probleme, nur als Geschenk für andere kann ich nichts kaufen. Wie kriege ich es nun hin? Gruß Markus
  14. Monaghan (Tier VI Premium)

    Hier bitte alles rein was mit der "Monaghan" zu tun hat, Erfahrungsberichte, Tipps, Fragen, Videos, usw. ;) Die USS Monaghan (DD-354) war das letzte Schiff des Zerstörers der Farragut-Klasse. Sie wurde nach Fähnrich John R. Monaghan benannt. Die USS Monaghan wurde am 21. November 1933 am Boston Navy Yard gelegt und am 9. Januar 1935 gestartet. Sie wurde von Miss Mary F. Monaghan, Nichte von Fähnrich Monaghan, gesponsert und am 19. April 1935 unter der Leitung von Commander R. R. Thompson in Dienst gestellt. Während der nächsten Jahre operierte die USS Monaghan hauptsächlich im Nordatlantik und bildete US Navy Personal aus, das im Zweiten Weltkrieg diente. Die USS Monaghan war während des Angriffs auf Pearl Harbor am 7. Dezember 1941 anwesend. Sie nahm 1942 an der Schlacht am Korallenmeer und der Schlacht von Midway teil. Die USS Monaghan wurde 1944 bei einem Taifun östlich der Philippinen versenkt. Verfügbarkeit Die Monaghan war zuerst Ende Mai / Anfang Juni 2018 über den Umweg über die Liberty-Container für die Halsey-Sammlung verfügbar. Beim Öffnen eines solchen Containers hat man eine gewisse Chance, einen Auftrag für verschiedene amerikanische Schiffe zu erhalten, unter anderem die Monaghan.
  15. Nuova offerta per chi ha account WOWS tramite Steam, termina il giorno 8/6/2018. https://store.steampowered.com/app/872610/World_of_Warships__Indianapolis_Pack/ Riporto dal sito: RIGUARDO QUESTO CONTENUTO Questo DLC non è compatibile con un account creato fuori da Steam. L'Indianapolis è un guerriero versatile. Grazie al consumabile Sorveglianza radar e all'elevata cadenza di fuoco, questo incrociatore è perfetto nel ruolo di nave supporto. Il suo efficace armamento primario consente di sfidare tranquillamente incrociatori di pari livello. Infine, come non citare il fatto che i suoi profitti di esperienza e crediti sono aumentati! Questo pacchetto contiene: capitano con 6 punti abilità spazio nel Porto 2.500 dobloni 50 segnali Equal Speed Charlie London, Papa Papa, India Bravo Terrathree, Zulu e Zulu Hotel +200% Exp per le prime 25 vittorie con l'incrociatore Indianapolis L'Indianapolis ti aiuterà a completare la nuova collezione americana. Solo con questa nave, dall'1° giugno al 25 luglio, potrai completare alcune missioni speciali. Con il suo aiuto potrai ricevere direttamente in gioco fino a 18 container della collezione Incrociatori americani.
  16. First, to prevent any attempt of wrongly channeled chatter here (as some forum users make, unfortunately), I want to highlight that a Wargaming representative said "If a compensation should be given to our players, this would be done by our developers automatically, without having to contact the Customer Support. Thank you for your understanding." Pay attention to this. "IF..." Well, this is not good enough. So we are at the mercy of WG. If they want to give us back what we lost, it is their decision. But the money already went in their pockets! Who cares? Right? I would like to know why Wargaming Europe keeps treating it's customers & players like crap, and what kind of compensations will be given to those who were unable to use their premium accounts in the days of the patches release. If we buy a couple of premium days few mornings before the update, It seems that we have to calculate and choose very carefully the hour we make the purchase, because we might very well loose 2-5 hours of use. It's just 2 or 5 hours (let's not forget the latter "ambiguous wording" of 31.05.2018 which kept customers on their toes for hours), but that premium time belong to US. WE paid for that time, to be used from the beginning to the end. And we don't get what we paid for. Period. Is this the way you conduct your business, Wargaming? Bellow you can see how customers are treated in Japan. 1 minute...
  17. HMS Rodney

    Just wanted to throw the question out there about potential addition of HMS Rodney and who would be interested/ does WG have any current plans for this? I feel that it would be great if we could have Rodney with it's historical forward launching torpedoes, scout aircraft, heavy AA armament and perhaps the Warspite style gun system with good AP but poorer HE performance. I reckon this could also be moved to T8 and have more HP, better armour and a smaller citadel in exchange for loss of the Nelson heal. What does everyone else think?
  18. Musashi isn't balance

    Goodmorning, what do you think about the musachi? I think is too stronk tier 9 bb, i have the izumo and i can't do anything for counter that ship
  19. Da Steam Versioni del Capitano con 6 punti, con spazio porto e la Anshan anche 1500 dobloni. Ne ho preso 2, la Graf Spee l'avevo già. https://steamcommunity.com/games/552990/announcements/detail/3786843201285697333 3 DLC sono ora disponibili! 10 maggio - WoWS
  20. Detailed proposal for a T8 HMS Vanguard

    'lo all. This is my first time on the forums, but as a regular WoWS player, I'm one of the many who would like to see HMS Vanguard introduced into the game. I know this discussion has been recycled, a lot, but I haven't seen any really detailed threads. Maybe there are and I've just missed them! People want Vanguard. The problem is balancing it. She was the last and most modern battleship, ever built, so she has to be of a relatively high tier. The game already has four Tier 7 Royal Navy "battleships" (air quotes for Hood), so T7 is oversaturated. Her 8x 15" guns sound fine on T6, but there's no way Vanguard should be down in T6, she's way too modern and was the successor to the T7 KGV class! So... T8 is the best fit, but balancing an eight-gunned 15" battleship at Tier 8, save from turning her into a Bismarck clone, would be challenging. I've been thinking on this and have a few ideas. I would like to hear what other people have to say and give their input. What is needed, I believe, is to make the under-gunned Vanguard feel modern. I'm not talking about skipping around at high speed, avoiding any kind of detection, twirling around her clunky opponents, all while laughing and flicking the two-fingered salute... no, I'm talking about a ship that feels unique and enjoyable to play, offers a little something different, is free from any game-breaking buffs and is strong and competitve, without ruining the enjoyment for the opposing team. I believe this ship can be made viable, while maintaining historical accuracy (which is something that matters to me), with every characteristic being based off of real world stats (as much as possible, at least!). I'll be quoting a lot from Wikipedia. ARMAMENT -Primary Battery Eight (4x twin) BL 15" Mk1 guns. Same as Warspite & Hood. This is the first hurdle: Warspite is to be feared in T6 matches and respected when fighting T8's. However, as a T8, Vanguard will have to face T10's... with eight 15" guns (!!). Big problem. What usually happens, in this scenario, is the ship is given an artificially-increased reload speed, to compensate for smaller guns, or lack of, or both (25s for Monarch, 26s for Bismarck & Tirpitz, 28s for Gascogne). It would be easy to slap a 25s reload on Vanguard and hope... but, please, don't!! Stick with the historically accurate 30s! A rate of fire buff is not required, to make this ship competitive. No, seriously, hear me out... The guns are small, for a Tier 8, yes. They are few, for a Tier 8, yes. They don't have a special reload, yes. So her shells don't do a lot of individual damage, she has a relatively small broadside and she doesn't fire that quickly. However... The guns in Vanguard were modernised, to the Mk I(N) RP12 design (more range). She could also utilise supercharges, increasing muzzle velocity, penetration and range. My idea would be to implement Vanguard into the game, so that her main guns are always using supercharges. If implemented properly, this would make Vanguard's guns competitive, despite the reduced number, smaller size and standard reload. An added benefit, is the people at WG could make the firing animation and sound of Vanguard's guns SPECTACULAR, owing to the supercharges! Imagine... a huge, thundering crack, an enormous muzzle-flash and an almighty spit of flame! She would have a badass reputation, from that, alone! Stats are as follows: Firing range- 30.68km (34.63km with supercharges). Now, obviously WoWs doesn't deal with actual ranges, more effective ranges (Warspite hit Giulio Cesare at 24.1km, but her in-game range is only 16.3km, for example), but it would be reasonable to give Vanguard an in-game range of around 20km, give-or-take. Muzzle Velocity- 749m/s (nothing confirmed for supercharges). This isn't enough. Luckily, if we follow the "Vanguard with supercharges" logic, we can boost that. I've seen quoted figues of over 850m/s, but let's say, for the sake of gameplay/balance, that Vanguard's guns have a velocity of around 920m/s. Let's also say, for the sake of balance, that her shells maintain good momentum, with low drag and good arcs (the shells fired are more modern than those of Warspite/Hood). This would give her 15" shells strong punching power. So another string to her bow would be increased penetration and normilisation angles. Krupp value would need to be increased, to make this work properly. "Ahh, but Roma has 15" guns and very good penetration, but suffers from over-pens on cruisers and bounces on battleships"... yes, but carrying-on the WoWs tradition that most British ships have fast-arming fuses on their AP shells, we give Vanguard the same 0.01s fuse times as the rest of the Royal Navy fleet (or similar, anyway). The fast fuses will ensure consistant penetrations -with less over-penetrations-, on cruisers... whereas the fast shells, with good normalisation angles would allow the shells to penetrate Battleship armour, before exploding, ensuring consistant penetrations and less bounces. This would mean that Vanguard would not be a long-range HE spammer and could reliably fire AP at battleships, at medium and long ranges. Obviously, they are still only 15" shells, so proper battleship & heavy cruiser angling & bow-tanking would defeat them, requiring a switch to HE. Proposed AP stats: Around 12k, extremely fast, enhanced normalisation, short fuse. Proposed HE stats: The same as Monarch would be fine. Vanguard has 1 less gun (broadside) and 2 less guns (bow-on), with less DPM, so she wouldn't be the devil fire-starter that opponents hate! Now, this is important: These guns have to be accurate. No, not accurate, but ACCURATE. I would propose WG make Vanguard the most accurate battleship in the game, with brilliant (for a battleship, we're not talking cruiser, here) horizontal & vertical dispersion and a sigma rating of 2.1. Yes, 2.1. Bearing in mind, this is not only an under-gunned battleship, but also THE MOST MODERN battleship, in the world, with extrordinarily advanced fire control systems: "Vanguard was unique among British battleships in having remote power control (RPC) for her main, secondary and tertiary guns along with the Admiralty Fire Control Table Mk X for surface fire control of the main armament. There were two director control towers (DCT) for the 15-inch guns, each carrying a "double cheese" Type 274 fire-control radar for range finding and spotting the fall of shot." " When the 15-inch gun turrets were modernised, their existing 15-foot (4.6 m) rangefinders were replaced by 30-foot (9.1 m) ones in all turrets except for 'A' and they were fitted for RPC in azimuth only. The turrets were also provided with de-humidifying equipment and insulation to improve their habitability." There is arguement here, to make Vanguard so accurate. Both with historical facts and gameplay balance in-mind. She can't throw as many -nor the biggest- shells down-range, so she needs to make each attack count. She could also be blessed with comfortable gunnery; fast (ish) rotating turrets, which would lend themselves to the more modern feel. Wherever you aim, these shells go! -In short, Vanguard's guns would provide less damage output per-shot, a weaker broadside, an ordinary reload and poor DPM... compared with those of almost all her rivals. But she would compensate, by having hard-hitting, deep-biting, reliable AP penetration and strong, dependable HE shells, both with high projectile speed, good arcs, shorter lead-times and monster accuracy. -Secondary Battery "The secondary armament consisted of sixteen 50-calibre QF 5.25-inch Mk I* dual-purpose guns in eight twin gun mounts. They had a maximum depression of −5° and a maximum elevation of 70°. They fired an 80-pound (36.3 kg) high-explosive shell at a muzzle velocity of 2,672 ft/s (814 m/s). The improved 5.25 turrets on Vanguard were claimed to be fully automatic, with a power-rammed breech and automatic tracking and elevation under radar control enabling a rate of fire of about 18 rounds per minute." OK, so 16 (8x twin) 5.25" rapid-firing secondaries. Not particularly impressive. Good for lightning fires, maybe. Give it a range of around 5km, give-or-take? The automatic tracking and elevation under radar control is interesting, make these the most accurate (if, somewhat weak) secondaries in the game. Dual purpose, also good for AA. Nice and modern! -AA "Short-range air defence was provided by 73 Bofors 40 mm AA guns in a variety of mountings. Vanguard had ten sextuple-barrel power-operated mounts concentrated in the superstructure and stern, a twin-barrel mount on 'B' turret, and 11 power-operated single mounts on the upper deck and rear superstructure. All mounts could depress to −10° and elevate to a maximum of +90°. The 40-millimetre (1.6 in) gun fired a 1.97-pound (0.89 kg) shell at a muzzle velocity of 2,890 ft/s (880 m/s) to a distance of 10,750 yards (9,830 m). The gun's rate of fire was approximately 120 rounds per minute." Pretty monstrous! In addition to the dual purpose secondaries, you have 10x sextuple (that's 60), 1x twin, 11x single 40mm Bofors AA guns! The AA rating on this thing should be pretty high and be very, very good for short-ranged defence. Not so much use for supporting teammates, however. SPEED AND MANEUVERABILITY She has the speed. She was designed to have 130,000shp and reach 30kn, but during trials, she achieved over 136,000shp and reached 31.57kn. In-game, I think the 136,000shp should be quoted, with a speed of 31.5kn. That's fair and would make her a very speedy (but not overly-so) battleship, able to respond to threats and push forward, into position... be the VANGUARD, so to speak! As for maneuverability... well, she's a large vessel (248.2m, or 814ft 4 inch). Almost 50 feet longer than KGV! So this would translate to a large turning circle. KGV's turning circle is 790m, so Vanguard's would have to realistically be nearer 810m, or something. However, due to complaints of the KGV class having poor seaworthiness: "The King George V-class ships had been built with almost no sheer to the main deck forwards to allow 'A' turret to fire straight forward at zero elevation, resulting in a poor sea boat that took a lot of water over the bow. Vanguard was redesigned as a result of this experience, significant sheer and flare being added to the bow. The ship was well regarded as seaworthy, able to keep an even keel in rough seas." This could realistically translate to a ship with a relatively quick rudder-shift time, that answers her rudder quickly (OK, the above has nothing to do with rudder, but we have little to play with, when talking about HANDLING in-game) and maintain good speed in a turn. Again, this will feel MODERN. ARMOUR AND HEALTH As you can see from the above photo, Vanguard is very similar to KGV. In-fact, the armour scheme was based on that of KGV. In-game, that could translate to having almost identical armour and health as Monarch, only slightly better. As wikipedia shall explain: "The ship's armour scheme was based on that of the King George V class with a thinner waterline belt and additional splinter protection. Originally the belt armour was equal to that of the older ships, but it had to be reduced to offset weight increases when the design was modified to reflect wartime experience. The waterline 460-foot (140.2 m) main belt was composed of Krupp cemented armour (KCA) 13 inches (330 mm) thick, but increased to 14 inches (356 mm) abreast the magazines. It was 24 feet (7.3 m) high and tapered to a thickness of 4.5 inches (114 mm) at the bottom edge of the belt. Fore and aft of the 12-inch (305 mm) transverse bulkheads that closed off the central citadel, the belt continued almost to the ends of the ship. Forward it tapered to a thickness of 2 inches (51 mm) and a height of 8 feet (2.4 m) and aft to the same thickness, but a height of 11 feet (3.4 m). At the aft end of the steering gear compartment was a 4-inch (102 mm) transverse bulkhead. After the Battle of the Denmark Strait in 1941, 1.5-inch (38 mm) non-cemented armour bulkheads were added on the sides of the magazines, to protect them from splinters from any hits from plunging shells that might have penetrated the ship's side beneath her belt. When the gun turrets from the First World War-era battlecruisers were modernised, their KCA faceplates were replaced by new ones 13 inches thick, and their roofs were replaced by 6-inch (152 mm) non-cemented armour plates. Their sides remained 7–9 inches (180–230 mm) in thickness. The barbettes for the 15-inch guns were 13 inches thick on the sides, but tapered to 11–12 inches (279–305 mm) closer to the centreline of the ship. The side and roof armour of the 5.25-inch turrets was 2.5 inches (64 mm) thick. Their ammunition hoists were protected by armour 2–6 inches (51–152 mm) thick. Intended to resist the impact of a 1,000-pound (450 kg) armour-piercing bomb dropped from a height of 14,000 feet (4,300 m), Vanguard's deck protection was identical to that of the King George V class. It consisted of six-inch non-cemented armour over the magazines that reduced to 5 inches (127 mm) over the machinery spaces. The armour continued forward and aft of the citadel at the lower-deck level. Forward it tapered in steps from five inches down to 2.5 inches near the bow. Aft, it protected the steering gear and propeller shafts with 4.5 inches of armour before tapering to a thickness of 2.5 inches near the stern. Unlike the Germans, French and Americans, the British no longer believed that heavy armour for the conning tower served any real purpose given that the chance of hitting it was very small; Vanguard's conning tower was therefore protected with 3 inches (76 mm) of armour on the face and 2.5 inches on the sides and rear. The secondary conning tower aft had 2 inches (51 mm) of armour on its sides. Vanguard's underwater protection was enhanced when she was redesigned in 1942 to reflect the lessons learned when Prince of Wales was sunk by Japanese torpedo bombers. It still consisted of a three-layer system of voids and liquid-filled compartments meant to absorb the energy of an underwater explosion. It was bounded on the inside by the 1.75–1.5-inch (44–38 mm) torpedo bulkhead. Her enlarged oil tanks reduced the empty spaces that could flood and cause the ship to list and greater provision was made to pump these spaces out. The longitudinal bulkheads of the side protection system were raised one deck higher to further subdivide the spaces behind the waterline armour belt. The side protection system had a maximum depth of 15 feet (4.6 m), but this decreased significantly as the ship narrowed at its ends. Over the length of the citadel, this system was found to be proof against 1,000 pounds (450 kg) of TNT during full-scale trials." So, a slightly reduced armour belt is the only are that Vanguard would lack, compared to KGV & Monarch. Her increased splinter-protection could translate to extra protection against HE shells and she also has seriously good torpedo protection. More on that: "Vanguard's design was revised again, while the ship was under construction in 1942, to reflect lessons learned from the loss of the King George V-class battleship Prince of Wales and operations with the other battleships. The space between the inboard and outboard propeller shafts was increased from 33.5 to 51.5 feet (10.2 to 15.7 m) to prevent a single torpedo from wrecking both shafts, and watertight access trunks were added to all spaces below the deep waterline to prevent progressive flooding through open watertight doors and hatches as happened to Prince of Wales." This could be reflected in higher torpdedo-damage-reduction, than her contemporaries, which would help, given her large turning circle. It would also make sense if she suffered flooding for a shorter period of time. As the "crew" on your WoWS battleship sealed the various compartments, this shorter flooding time would reflect the thought and design that went into the ship. She also had a double-bottom arrangement (two "skins") and was "divided into 27 main compartments, with water-tight bulkheads". Overall, her armour would be tougher than Monarch, with better torpedo defence and increased damage recovery. She would also have more health. However, she might be slightly more susceptible to citadel damage. CONCEALMENT AND STEALTH OK, she's a big, long, wide ship. However, she does have quite a sleek side-profile/silhouette and looks quite sleek, overall. See below: I would be tempted to reflect this with pretty good surface detectibility. Not Monarch, nor Roma stealth, but better than average. Overall, pretty sneaky, but won't surprise any cruisers. I would also reflect the enormous length and width with pretty average-to-poor air detectibility. Planes will see this thing from above, it's not a Yamato or Grosser Kurfurst, but it's no light cruiser! EXTRAS Now, if... BIG IF... she still wasn't quite up to snuff, there is one other thing I thought of... I don't believe it is necessary, but I'd like to know what people think: Now, obviously, almost all WW2 battleships had radar... WAIT! WAIT! LET ME FINISH!... and Vanguard's would be the best of them... I SAID LET ME FINISH!!... The thing is, I am not a fan of radar in WoWS, certainly not on a battleship (or Belfast) and I know most people feel the same. However, this super modern battleship, last of its kind, does feel a bit blind, with no spotter plane and no hydro. Add hydro, if you want, standard hydro isn't that powerful on a battleship. What if they gave Vanguard a completely unique form of radar, where it is a pulse, or a PING... extremely long ranged, the entire map, even... but it only highlighted every enemy ship for 1 second?? Like the radar gadget thing on Aliens Vs Predator! Or like a real sonar pulse. PING!... every enemy ship is spotted for one second... and they're gone again. This would not allow anyone to fire upon the enemy, there is just no time, but it would allow the fleet to know roughly where the enemies are (I say "roughly", as there's no way the enemy ships would maintain position). It would only have maybe 3 charges and would CERTAINLY not break the game! No-one would get shot, as a result... but it would give a brief glimpse into the enemy's plans. I can see this being quite uselful in clan battles, but not a deciding factor. Basically, that's my idea on Vanguard, it's taken me a LOOOONG time to type this up, but I am keen to know what others think. Thanks for reading (those who have). I'll leave a brief summary: VANGUARD Tier 8 Pros: -Fast battleship -Good armour scheme with additional torpedo & flooding protection -Good AA protection -Comfortable gun handling -Maintains speed in a turn -EXTREMELY accurate guns (for a battleship), with supercharges -Very fast shells, with short lead-times and good arcs -Very good AP penetration, with enhanced normalisation & krupp rating -Good, dependable HE shells, with good damage and fire chance -Pretty good concealment from sea -(possible unique radar pulse) Cons: -Small guns for tier, no overmatch -Normal reload and only 8 guns; gives poor DPM -Lower damage per AP shell, than most rivals -Smaller broadside than most rivals -Pretty lacklustre secondary armament -Large turning circle -Pretty poor concealment from air -No spotter plane Overall, I think this would be a fine ship. Dependable, fun to play, does a good job at maintaining historical accuracy, but still allows for game balance. I think the modern "flavour" would shine through, giving an entirely unique -but still quintessentially Battleship- form of gameplay. It would also NOT ruin the fun for the enemy team, nor would it be any better than the non-premium tech tree ships, which I think is extremely important. Thanks, everyone.
  21. With the upcoming Stalingrad and especially relevant Kronshtadt I want to revisit Alaska and later some other Super crusiers/Large Cruisers/Cruiser killers/battlecruisers that are applicable to this new archtype WG is coming with. Previously it has been very unclear whether Alaska would be a BB, a CA or given special treatment. As Kronshtadt would indicate, these ships will get special treatment as a hybrid between the BB and Cruiser in gameplay terms. Getting a little and losing a little compared to both standard ship types. Hull, Survivability and Armor Main armament Secondary and anti aircraft armaments Maneuverability Concealment Some notes, I opted to give Alaska the USN BB damage control party, as I think it would help differentiate Alaska from the tech tree cruisers, but also from the other Large Cruisers of this ship archtype. The stats are a mix of historical data, gameplay data from existing ships and compromises between US CAs and BBs mostly Baltimore and Iowa as they are the closest ingame contemporaries from the same nation and what authors usually use to compare Alaska in litterature. All stats are double checked and compared to Kronshtadt for balance. In this state I think Alaska strikes a good balance between heavy cruiser and battleship, is balanced vs. its current ingame rival Kronshtadt and most importantly has a lot of national flavour from USN tech trees.
  22. In diesem Topic möchte ich euch gerne den leichten Flugzeugträger Ibuki vorstellen, ursprünglich ein Kreuzer der Kaiserlichen Japanischen Marine. Wie viele wissen ist die Ibuki als Kreuzer bereits im Spiel implementiert. Jedoch möchte ich mit euch auch darüber sprechen ob es möglich wäre, die Ibuki als Flugzeugträger ins Spiel zu übernhemen. Eventuell ein equivalent (wenn man so möchte) zur Amerikanischen Saipan. Allgemeines: ︿ Die Ibuki, welche in "Rapid Naval Armaments Supplement" Programme der Kaiserlichen Japanischen Marine integriert war wurde 1941 als Schwerer Kreuzer in Auftrag gegeben. Am 24 April 1942 wurde die Ibuki in der Schiffswerft "Kure Naval Arsenal" niedergelegt. Jedoch wurde ihr Bau am 30.Juni eingestellt. Einen Monat später wurden die Arbeiten wieder aufgenommen und sie wurde am 5. April 1943 bei der Namensgebungskonferenz nach dem Berg Ibuki benannt. Die Marine erwog, sie am 25. August in einen leichten Flugzeugträger umzuwandeln. Während die Pläne für die Bekehrung vorbereitet wurden, wurde sie vom U-Boot-Begleitschiff Jingei vom 19.-21. Dezember zum "Sasebo Naval Arsenal" in Sasebo geschleppt. Die Fertigstellung des Schiffes war ursprünglich für März 1945 geplant, wurde aber aufgrund von Verspätungen für August verschoben. Die Arbeit wurde bis zum 16. März 1945 fortgesetzt, aber sie wurde eingestellt, als sie zu 80% fertig war, um sich auf den Bau kleiner U-Boote zu konzentrieren, die benötigt wurden, um Japan gegen eine amerikanische Invasion zu verteidigen. Sie war in der Ebisu Bay in der Nähe von Sasebo verankert und ergab sich dort am 2. September zusammen mit dem Rest des japanischen Militärs. Die Ibuki wurde im Zeitraum von 22. November 1946 - 1. August 1947 in Sasebo verschrottet. ﹀ Konstruktion / Panzerung / Bewaffnung: ︿ Wie ursprünglich geplant hat das Schiff eine Länge von 200.6 m, eine Schiffsbreite von 20.2 m und einen Tiefgang von 6.04 m. Die Ibuki verdrängte 12.220 Tonnen bei Standardlast und 14.828 Tonnen bei Voll last. Sie war mit vier Kampon-Getriebe-Dampfturbosätzen mit insgesamt 152.000 Pferdestärken (113.000 kW) ausgerüstet, die jeweils einen 3,9 Meter langen Propeller antrieben. Dampf wurde von acht dreirädrigen Wasserrohrkesseln vom Kampon Ro Gō-Typ geliefert, die dem Schiff eine Höchstgeschwindigkeit von 35 Knoten (65 km) geben sollten. Ibuki trug 2.163 Tonnen Heizöl, was ihr eine geschätzte Reichweite von 6.300 nautischen Meilen (11.700 km) bei 18 Knoten (33 km) bescherte. Der Panzergürtel über der Wasserlinie des Schiffes erstreckte sich von den vorderen bis zu den hinteren Magazinen unter den vorderen und hinteren Türmen. Über den Maschinenräumen war es an den Seiten der Magazine 100 mm und 140 mm. Die äußeren Enden der vorderen und hinteren Maschinenräume waren durch eine 105 mm großen Querwand geschützt. Die Magazine wurden durch vordere und hintere Querschotte geschützt, die 95-140 mm waren. Die Dicke des Panzerdecks reichte von 35-40 mm auf der flachen und 60 mm. Die Seiten des Turms waren 100 mm, während das Dach 50 mm war. Die Hauptgeschütztürme hatten an allen Seiten und auf dem Dach eine Panzerbreite von 25 mm. Die geplante Hauptbewaffnung der Ibuki-Klasse sollte zehn 50-Kaliber-20-cm-Geschütze des 3.Typs Nr. 2 sein, die in zwei Geschütztürmen montiert waren, drei vorwärts und zwei achtern. Die Geschütze konnten auf -5 ° abfallen und hatten eine maximale Höhe von + 55 ° und eine maximale Reichweite von 29.900 m, desweiteren bestand die Sekundärbewaffnung aus acht Kaliber 12,7 cm Typ 89. Flugabwehrkanonen in Zwillingslagern bestehen. Sie hatten eine maximale Reichweite von 14.800 m und eine maximale Obergrenze von 9.400 m. Die Ibuki sollte auch mit vier Zwillings-25-mm-Typ-96-leichten Flugabwehr-Geschützen ausgerüstet sein. Sie hatten eine maximale Reichweite von 7.500 m und eine effektive Obergrenze von 5.500 m. Die maximale effektive Feuerrate lag nur zwischen 110 und 120 Schuss pro Minute aufgrund der häufigen Notwendigkeit, die 15-Runden-Magazine zu wechseln. Zwei Zwillings 13,2 mm Typ 93 Maschinengewehr sollten mit 2.000 Schuss pro Geschütz auf der Brücke montiert werden. Desweiteren mit vier rotierenden, 4 x 61 cm großen Torpedorohren vom Typ 92 ausgerüstet sein, zwei an jeder Breitseite. Das Schiff trug 24 Torpedos vom Typ 93, 16 in den Röhren und acht in Reserve. Schnellladeausrüstung wurde für jede Halterung installiert, die es erlaubte, die Reservetorpedos in drei bis fünf Minuten unter idealen Bedingungen zu laden. Eine Frühwarnung wäre von einem Luftsuchradar vom Typ 2, Mark 2, Modell 1, das oben auf dem Vormast montiert ist, ein passives Hydrophon-System vom Typ 93 wäre im Bug angebracht worden. Die Ibuki wurde so konzipiert, um drei Flugzeuge auf einer Plattform tragen. Diese hätten aus einem dreisitzigen Aichi E13A und zwei zweisitzigen Yokosuka E14Y-Wasserflugzeugen bestanden. Sie wären durch ein Paar Flugzeugkatapulte gestartet worden, eines auf jeder Seite der Flugzeugplattform. ﹀ Umbau: ︿ Die zwei hintere Turbosätze, die vier Achterkessel und die beiden innersten Propellerwellen wurden mit ihren Propellern entfernt. Die Abgasleitungen für die übrigen Kessel wurden auf der Steuerbordseite des Rumpfes zu einem nach unten gekrümmten Trichter zusammengefasst. Der zur Verfügung gestellte Raum wurde für zusätzliche Treibstofftanks sowie Bomben- und Torpedomagazine mit einer Kapazität von 24 Bomben und zwei Torpedos verwendet. Das Schiff konnte jetzt 3.060 Tonnen Öl transportieren, genug für 7.900 Meilen bei einer Geschwindigkeit von 18 Knoten (33 km). Die reduzierte Leistung bedeutete, dass Ibukis Höchstgeschwindigkeit nur 29 Knoten betrug (54 km). Im Zuge des Umbaus wurde der vorhandene Überbau demontiert, ein neues Hangardeck wurde oberhalb des bestehenden Oberdecks errichtet und ein 205 m langes Flugdeck in voller Länge hinzugefügt. Das Schiff wurde ausgebeult, um ihre Stabilität zu verbessern, was ihren Strahl auf maximal 21,2 Meter unterhalb der Wasserlinie erhöhte. Die verdrängung des Schiffes erhöhte sich auf 14.800 Tonnen und das zusätzliche Gewicht erhöhte ihren Tiefgang auf 6,31 m. Zu Beginn sollte das Schiff eine sehr leichte Bewaffnung von nur 22 Dreifach-25-Millimeter-Geschützbefestigungen haben, die von acht Typ-95-Feuerleitanlagen kontrolliert wurden, aber diese wurde 1944 modifiziert, um vier 60-Kaliber-8-cm-Typ 98 Dual-Zweck Geschütze zu ersetzten, die in zwei Zwillingsgeschütztürmen montiert sind, und vier 28-Rohr-Trägerraketen für 12 Zentimeter Flugabwehrraketen. Dies gab dem Schiff insgesamt 48 25-mm-Kanonen in 16 Dreifach-Halterungen. An der Spitze der Insel sollte Ibuki einen 2-Meter-Entfernungsmesser und einen Typ-21-Radar haben. Im Jahr 1944 wurde das Radar vom Typ 21 zu einer einziehbaren Halterung im Flugdeck in der Nähe des Bugs gebracht, ein Suchradar vom Typ 13 sollte auf der Insel installiert werden. ﹀ Flugzeuge: Die Luftgruppe des Schiffes bestand aus 27 Flugzeugen: Mitsubishi A7M Reppū Aichi B7A Ryusei Tauch- / Torpedobombern.
  23. Où qu’il est le Massachausette ?

    Oï ! On avait entendu parlé d’un cuirassé ressemblant à l’Alabama, le Massachusetts, il y a bientôt un an. Du coup... Où qu’il est passé le Massachausette ? On a plus eu de nouvelles pendant un bon bout de temps quand même.
  24. Why the Asashio is fine (to WG).

    The Asashio is perfectly balanced, and ready to release as is or with minimal adjustments, this I have concluded as counterargument to the naysayers. If it is OP all WG need to say is “we made a mistake” and pull it from sales. But not before players rush to grab themselves an OP toy. And a none-OP ship will never sell, no? And if it is not OP it is lauded as an “everyman’s ship”. WG is praised, it becomes a staple seller, and WG gains profits anyways. And no ship WG releases will ever be too OP that a pull-from-sale is insufficient to address. Think the old breed premiums and a few singular new premiums which were ... bit too purposefully designed to be “considerate” to the player/buyer. That is because they will always have the following traits: 1. A slight but obvious flaw or downside is designed right within their primary armament. A “tradeoff”. But otherwise performs “marvellously” against the “intended targets”. And no idiot will be trying to use it against “unintended targets” right. 2. Their primary armament will only cause significant stress for a minority portion of players at a time. And at least one portion of the population will be a direct counter to this ship. (OP CVs will only cause stress to other CVs. OP DDs will be hunted by other specific ships or the meta in general and OP CAs will always eat a citadel or two.) This means that at any given time the amount of players crying to WG will only be a minority, and thus unable to generate great disorder on forums or anywhere else. And their situations will also be a minority experience thus unlikely to garner much support. Especially CVs. 3. Its strengths may be spread out between polar scenarios and situations, but still OP in each. This is to prevent the statistics reflecting on how OP they are. (A ship may have great AA but it’s other strengths will be something far detached from AA. A ship strong against cruisers will be strong in another place as well but these additional strengths are unlikely reflective or active at the same time as the same situation it is in vs cruisers.) 4. Possibility of a common “critical failure” situation must exist for that ship, either via hard design or in “noob trap” scenarios where inexperienced players will choose an option or build for that ship which is inefficient and astoundingly failure. In this way WG can claim that the ship “is balanced and not OP”. Experienced players however will have no trouble using the ship to sealclub efficiently. In short the stats and examples of the inexperienced players becomes a publicity smokescreen for the real purposes of that ship. 5. Another premium ship in a completely new direction and different type will be envisioned and released to high publicity after the previous premium direction is “saturated” or at “high-publicity risk”. Via rotating between methods and redirecting players’ attention, based on careful analysis of prior situational feedback, WG is able to sustain a cycle of success. A purposefully “weak” or “show” premium is released every now and then to add variety and break the pattern of these cycles, and high-profile, historically esteemed ships are usually dealt with more cautiously and deliberately. 6. The premium ships are “MM” safe meaning they will be viable both undertier and as top tier. This is a highly attractive trait because it takes out a major stressor in the game. It is also part of the tactic of “far apart” OPness. Combined with economy and Captain training, this ensures players are psychologically soothed when using the ship to game. This trait is viable because of WGs philosophy of introducing purposeful stressors into their games, even to the point of purposefully “crippling” silver ships (with exception of T10s which will never have to face a direct premium competitor as WG does not release T10 premiums). In short, premiums are the ideal and obvious solution (too obvious) to the chaotic and toxic problem which is the game itself. 7. Good players cannot recognize or be sensitive to quite a lot of these traits since they are good and will perform and enjoy the game even through a lot of the negatives. They provide a kind of false advertisement and debased goodwill/positiveness on the purpose of premiums. To the point that we think “premiums are gimmicky, quirky situational ships that require skill to play well.” Amongst other understanding things. In short it is unwitting propaganda. But as I have made points of already, the purpose of premiums is not some scholarly venture at new possibilities and creativity in this game, but rather a highly controlled and engineered conundrum leveraged on players to elicit specific conformity and reaction. Premiums will always be OP and preferable, but not obviously. Just like the game will always be F2P but many other things as well. Now I must prepare for my trip to the Gulag. (But not before I give penance to all the seals I have clubbed with premiums.) Been nice knowing you all.
  25. Eventually Vanguard would make its appearence in World of warships, Hopefully in the tier 8 or even 9 bracket. What would you like to be the ships features and characteristics? I hope for a design that emphasizes on AP rather than HE, deadly accurate guns, nice handling, good penetration values. Since it was the world last battleship to be completed, it should reflect qualities that made the ship better than its predecessors. Although it has only 8 15" guns similar to Warspite, Hood and many other RN battleships, it could make use of the supercharge propellant and better fire control direction. What do you think?
×