Will WoWS only contain real ships?

[Mr_Sukebe]

Possibly answered before, but I'd like to sanity check.

From what I've seen so far, the ships I've looked at were all real, which I rather like.

Does anyone know if WG plan to introduce a load of "well this design was found on the back of a fag packet, so we'll introduce it", as they did in WOT with tanks like the WT E100?

 

If they do, can the "non-real" at least be if anything a little under-powered.

 

Personally, I'd rather only have real ships, but hey, that's just me.

Yes, I'm aware that it would mean that the Yamato would probably be the only T10 BS, as no one else built anything close to it.  I can live with that and have ZERO issues with it.  On a similar note, also means that the US would have the best carriers, again, don't have a problem with that either.

[Kyono]

The entirety of the Russian Navy will be paper ships 

 

[DasLumiman]

Well both the Amagi and the Montana never existed, but then again  their designs were real. 

[Armo1000]

The entirety of the Russian Navy will be paper ships 

 

And the ones that aren't will be British and other loaned ships.

[Deamon93]

Possibly answered before, but I'd like to sanity check.

From what I've seen so far, the ships I've looked at were all real, which I rather like.

Does anyone know if WG plan to introduce a load of "well this design was found on the back of a fag packet, so we'll introduce it", as they did in WOT with tanks like the WT E100?

 

 

If they do, can the "non-real" at least be if anything a little under-powered.

 

 

Personally, I'd rather only have real ships, but hey, that's just me.

Yes, I'm aware that it would mean that the Yamato would probably be the only T10 BS, as no one else built anything close to it.  I can live with that and have ZERO issues with it.  On a similar note, also means that the US would have the best carriers, again, don't have a problem with that either.

 

There will be paper ships because there are some pesky treaties(ie Washington and London Treaties) who messed up a lot of people. Regarding Russia in particular they got messed up by the Soviet Revolution plus the backstab by Adolf, in both occasions they had a fair number of ships under construction which had to get stopped.

 

 

And the ones that aren't will be British and other loaned ships.

The number of British ships in the Russian tree is very limited though(Royal Sovereign and that is it pretty much).

[Makoniel]

Senjo, Myogi and the forthcoming Izumo never existed, they were only drawing or preliminary studies. Phoenix too, and I believe it's the case for the tier V US DD too. 

Russian navy will contain a lot of prototypes because their navy was hugely small. They had battleships... One class of them actually during WW2. The gangut class, WW1 dreadnoughts. All the other russian battleships above tier 6 would be paperships, exept Sovietsky Soyouz class that was under construction at the beginning of ww2. 

[Vanhal]

Mr_Sukebe, on 11 May 2015 - 12:00 AM, said:

Possibly answered before

 

Many times. The answer was "no".

 

Mr_Sukebe, on 11 May 2015 - 12:00 AM, said:

From what I've seen so far, the ships I've looked at were all real, which I rather like.

 

Well, those that weren't real also looked like they were to you it seems (btw did you see that space event ships? Also looked real? ). That's called "plausible". I would even play a Gondorian or Klingon Navy if they were plausible and comparable to real navies. I hope there would be as much of paper ships as they need to make interesting lines. That's much better than:

1. Incomplete trees, full of holes, loose ends and so on.

2. Boring trees with same ships all over - 3 version of Kongo on 3 different tiers, 2 versions of Yamato, etc.

3. NF-type [edited] with Regina Margarita pre-dreadnought at the same level as bloody King George V

 

Mr_Sukebe, on 11 May 2015 - 12:00 AM, said:

If they do, can the "non-real" at least be if anything a little under-powered.

 

That's a joke, right? Even making premiums underpowered is wrong and you want to dig that hole even deeper?

 

Mr_Sukebe, on 11 May 2015 - 12:00 AM, said:

Possibly answered before

 

Many times. The answer was "no".

 

Mr_Sukebe, on 11 May 2015 - 12:00 AM, said:

From what I've seen so far, the ships I've looked at were all real, which I rather like.

 

Well, those that weren't real also looked like they were to you it seems (btw did you see that space event ships? Also looked real? ). That's called "plausible". I would even play a Gondorian or Klingon Navy if they were plausible and comparable to real navies. I hope there would be as much of paper ships as they need to make interesting lines. That's much better than:

1. Incomplete trees, full of holes, loose ends and so on.

2. Boring trees with same ships all over - 3 version of Kongo on 3 different tiers, 2 versions of Yamato, etc.

3. NF-type [edited] with Regina Margarita pre-dreadnought at the same level as bloody King George V

 

Mr_Sukebe, on 11 May 2015 - 12:00 AM, said:

If they do, can the "non-real" at least be if anything a little under-powered.

 

That's a joke, right? Even making premiums underpowered is wrong and you want to dig that hole even deeper?

 

Mr_Sukebe, on 11 May 2015 - 12:00 AM, said:

Possibly answered before

 

Many times. The answer was "no".

 

Mr_Sukebe, on 11 May 2015 - 12:00 AM, said:

From what I've seen so far, the ships I've looked at were all real, which I rather like.

 

Well, those that weren't real also looked like they were to you it seems (btw did you see that space event ships? Also looked real? ). That's called "plausible". I would even play a Gondorian or Klingon Navy if they were plausible and comparable to real navies. I hope there would be as much of paper ships as they need to make interesting lines. That's much better than:

1. Incomplete trees, full of holes, loose ends and so on.

2. Boring trees with same ships all over - 3 version of Kongo on 3 different tiers, 2 versions of Yamato, etc.

3. NF-type [edited] with Regina Margarita pre-dreadnought at the same level as bloody King George V

 

Mr_Sukebe, on 11 May 2015 - 12:00 AM, said:

If they do, can the "non-real" at least be if anything a little under-powered.

 

That's a joke, right? Even making premiums underpowered is wrong and you want to dig that hole even deeper?

 

Mr_Sukebe, on 11 May 2015 - 12:00 AM, said:

Possibly answered before

 

Many times. The answer was "no".

 

Mr_Sukebe, on 11 May 2015 - 12:00 AM, said:

From what I've seen so far, the ships I've looked at were all real, which I rather like.

 

Well, those that weren't real also looked like they were to you it seems (btw did you see that space event ships? Also looked real? ). That's called "plausible". I would even play a Gondorian or Klingon Navy if they were plausible and comparable to real navies. I hope there would be as much of paper ships as they need to make interesting lines. That's much better than:

1. Incomplete trees, full of holes, loose ends and so on.

2. Boring trees with same ships all over - 3 version of Kongo on 3 different tiers, 2 versions of Yamato, etc.

3. NF-type [edited] with Regina Margarita pre-dreadnought at the same level as bloody King George V

 

Mr_Sukebe, on 11 May 2015 - 12:00 AM, said:

If they do, can the "non-real" at least be if anything a little under-powered.

 

That's a joke, right? Even making premiums underpowered is wrong and you want to dig that hole even deeper?

 

[Kyono]

Quadruple post? 

 

[Deamon93]

 

Many times. The answer was "no".

 

 

Well, those that weren't real also looked like they were to you it seems (btw did you see that space event ships? Also looked real? ). That's called "plausible". I would even play a Gondorian or Klingon Navy if they were plausible and comparable to real navies. I hope there would be as much of paper ships as they need to make interesting lines. That's much better than:

1. Incomplete trees, full of holes, loose ends and so on.

2. Boring trees with same ships all over - 3 version of Kongo on 3 different tiers, 2 versions of Yamato, etc.

3. NF-type [edited] with Regina Margherita pre-dreadnought at the same level as bloody King George V

 

 

That's a joke, right? Even making premiums underpowered is wrong and you want to dig that hole even deeper?

Corrected a typo . In any case i agree with you regarding paper stuff: better to have it rather than having clones/holes/questionable placements.

 

Quadruple post? 

 

Most likely it was a forum issue.

[Pete_SB]

Phoenix isn't real

[chaplainDMK]

If you're going to "calibrate" tier 10 to Yamato, Midway and Des Moines, you'll need a lot of paper ships to make every nation balanced. Even the Royal Navy never launched anything that could realistically even come up to about tier 8, maybe 9 in a few lucky cases, compared to these ships. 

[Ishiro32]

For me the most notable paper ship is Amagi as I really feel she should be a Carrier. I mean they changed the design and started remodeling her completly and if there was no earthquake she would be comissioned without a problem. It doesn't feel right that she is a BB while her sister ships will be CVs. Oh well.

Also any tier X BB other than Yamato will be a paper design which for me personally sucks, because it kinda breakes my immersion, but whatever.

 

I wonder If we will see Hibiki (Верный) in the Russian Navy.

[Vanhal]

Omg, what was that?

I've got some problems with internet yesterday and such were the results, i didn't even managed to load the forum after clicking "post". Oh well, if some moderator is reading this please remove unnecessary copies, as well as this post. Thanks in advance.

[Deamon93]

Phoenix isn't real

 

Phoenix is the preliminary design of Omaha. Since you can't make prototypes making tons of paper and studies was the only way to go.

 

If you're going to "calibrate" tier 10 to Yamato, Midway and Des Moines, you'll need a lot of paper ships to make every nation balanced. Even the Royal Navy never launched anything that could realistically even come up to about tier 8, maybe 9 in a few lucky cases, compared to these ships. 

 

There should be designs which can sort of compete with Yamato/Montana. Des Moine is clearly a problem and Midway we'll see.

 

For me the most notable paper ship is Amagi as I really feel she should be a Carrier. I mean they changed the design and started remodeling her completly and if there was no earthquake she would be comissioned without a problem. It doesn't feel right that she is a BB while her sister ships will be CVs. Oh well.

Also any tier X BB other than Yamato will be a paper design which for me personally sucks, because it kinda breakes my immersion, but whatever.

 

I wonder If we will see Hibiki (Верный) in the Russian Navy.

 

That would also be present with Tosa/Kaga eventually. Besides without them would be a problem to fill the gaps since Japan stopped building the new battleships and battlecruisers after the Washington Treaty and, until Yamato, they never built a new BB.

 

Omg, what was that?

I've got some problems with internet yesterday and such were the results, i didn't even managed to load the forum after clicking "post". Oh well, if some moderator is reading this please remove unnecessary copies, as well as this post. Thanks in advance.

 

I had similar problems too, oh well it's not a problem .

 

 

[Ishiro32]

I actually would be glad If there was a clear destinction between real ships and paper ones. I don't mean gameplay or anything, but just for example small symbol in tech tree, or something like that. 

[Battledragon]

Well both the Amagi and the Montana never existed, but then again  their designs were real. 

 

Amagi existed, but it was never finished.  It was due to be converted into an aircraft carrier but the ship was damaged beyond repair in the builder's dock by the great Kanto Earthquake in 1923.  The hull of the incomplete battleship Kaga was substituted and became the carrier of the same name.

[Vanhal]

I actually would be glad If there was a clear destinction between real ships and paper ones. I don't mean gameplay or anything, but just for example small symbol in tech tree, or something like that. 

 

I don't think that knowledge is particularly hard to find, even if someone don't have any interest in the ships themselves.

[Ishiro32]

I know it's not hard to find, but it just... you know... some flavor. It might be cool for people who are too lazy to even google name of the ship they control.

[fnord_disc]

 For me the most notable paper ship is Amagi as I really feel she should be a Carrier.

 

Amagi and Tosa are much less of a paper ship than Izumo or Ishizuchi (the latter is incredibly obscure).

 

At least the Japanese built a couple of Amagis and Tosas. They wound up serving in a totally different form though...

 

It's kind of lucky that the lead ship of each class was either damaged or too far along to be converted, so we can introduce both classes to the battleship tree using the class name and to the CV conversion tree using the ship's name. It's very obvious (to me) that two such famous ships as Akagi and Kaga will be implemented, so I wouldn't sweat it.

 

Or are you talking about the Unryuu-class carrier Amagi? While that is a real carrier, it did nothing of importance during the war, and the Unryuus are an insignificant project from a design perspective.

 

I suspect the reason you associate Amagi with a carrier is because you have her in Kancolle and Kancolle doesn't have paper ships like the original Amagi class other than Akagi.

 

The 1920 Amagi-class BC is well-known, though. I wouldn't even call them true paper ships, personally, because they were almost done in 1922. The Amagis are definitely not the same level of paper ship as Zao or Ishizuchi.

[jacko01]

For me the most notable paper ship is Amagi as I really feel she should be a Carrier. I mean they changed the design and started remodeling her completly and if there was no earthquake she would be comissioned without a problem. It doesn't feel right that she is a BB while her sister ships will be CVs. Oh well.

Also any tier X BB other than Yamato will be a paper design which for me personally sucks, because it kinda breakes my immersion, but whatever.

 

I wonder If we will see Hibiki (Верный) in the Russian Navy.

It was actually initially designed as a battle cruiser but because of limits due to treaties the design was changed to an Aircraft carrier and even then she was still not built 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amagi-class_battlecruiser

[Ishiro32]

My initial confusion was from Kancolle ideed and Unryuu-class and it happened when I started playing game, but this confusion only resulted in researching more about Amagi-class history as a BB and CV, with Akagi and Kaga at the front of it. 

It makes sense to to use Amagi as BB to fill the slots and have more ships that were "real" and this is intresting design and actually kinda fun to have here. But if Amagi were to be comissioned she would be the same as her sisters. Idea of her as a BB was scrapped, that's why it is kinda strange for me to see her and the fact the she was so close to seting sail as a CV is what is annoying for me a bit. Much more that full paper ships.

 

[PhroX]

Loosely speaking, I see, maybe, 5 categories with regards to "how historical was this ship?"

 

a - Actually built

b - Construction began but was never completed (e.g. the Lion class, to use a British example)

c - Detailed design work exists, but construction never started (e.g. the G3 class "battlecruiser")

d - Concept design only (rough drawings of the ship were made but nothing more)

e - WG completely made up designs (to use a WoT example, the WTE-100)

 

Personally, I hope the game will be limited to the top three - that is to say, ships that either did exists, or could feasibly have existed had things gone a little differently, rather than "here's my crazy idea for a new warship" - as only putting in "real" ships is not feasible if they want full tech trees, although I can understand that in some cases they might need to drop into category d for some nations (Soviets maybe? I'm not really sure how well developed their various designs were). Hopefully, they'll never have to make crap up again.

 

The other question is regarding the "historical" nature of some upgrades, particuarly on ships that were never built. The aforementionned G3, as per the deisgns, would probably have the main battery and armour to stand at T9, but as she was to be built in the early '20s, her AA and fire control in particular would be very lacking. On the other hand, had she been built, it's pretty hard to believe that she wouldn't have had an upgrade in, say, the late '30s to incoporate more modern features in the way other Bristih warships were, so, for me, a fictional but plausible upgrade for ships like this is ok - indeed, not including such an upgrade is less believable.

[fnord_disc]

a - Actually built

b - Construction began but was never completed (e.g. the Lion class, to use a British example)

c - Detailed design work exists, but construction never started (e.g. the G3 class "battlecruiser")

d - Concept design only (rough drawings of the ship were made but nothing more)

e - WG completely made up designs (to use a WoT example, the WTE-100)

 

Personally, I hope the game will be limited to the top three

 

Senjo/Zao is a mix between d and e. There are a couple of Japanese secondary sources that ruminate on the 1941A cruiser, but they're all speculative. What you see in the game is mostly invention.

 

Ishizuchi also a d.

[Userext]

For me the most notable paper ship is Amagi as I really feel she should be a Carrier. I mean they changed the design and started remodeling her completly and if there was no earthquake she would be comissioned without a problem. It doesn't feel right that she is a BB while her sister ships will be CVs. Oh well.

Also any tier X BB other than Yamato will be a paper design which for me personally sucks, because it kinda breakes my immersion, but whatever.

 

I wonder If we will see Hibiki (Верный) in the Russian Navy.

 

wait a second Bismarck is a battleship and germans use manly words for it(they dont call battleships "she") why are IJN BBs called she?

[Deamon93]

 

wait a second Bismarck is a battleship and germans use manly words for it(they dont call battleships "she") why are IJN BBs called she?

 

Because ships are considered as "she" pretty much everywhere.