Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Pametrada

British heavy cruiser 3D models

32 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
1,906 posts

WG's model and texture artists are very good. No doubt about that.

They deserve so much more credit.

 

The PR departement however is a different story. 

  • Cool 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BBMM]
Players
5,775 posts
7,334 battles

 

2 hours ago, Inappropriate_noob said:

Nice to see WoW's getting some praise here, and it is true, the modelling of ships in general is second to none.

...which is why it would be a waste to have submarines that cannot be on the surface. :Smile_trollface:

  • Cool 5
  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,075 posts
12,563 battles

Yep the Team working on the 3D models always do an amazing job! :cap_like:

 

Shame that the Gimmicks... I mean Balancing department ruin all their work most of the time... :fish_palm:

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,619 posts
18,174 battles

Very true the level of detail in the models is truly beautiful, I admit I often enjoy exploring the ships in my port checking out all the little details.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PARAZ]
Beta Tester
13,774 posts
19,465 battles
10 hours ago, MortenTardo said:

The PR departement however is a different story. 

 

I'd also pan either management or coders for their unwillingness or inability to fix the incredible amount of bugs still left in the game.

Seriously, CN server on 0.7.3 isn't nearly as buggy as the current one.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,600 posts
18,787 battles
49 minutes ago, lovelacebeer said:

Very true the level of detail in the models is truly beautiful, I admit I often enjoy exploring the ships in my port checking out all the little details.

It is one of the few reasons I still play this game, the awesome ships, and (some) of the basic gameplay. Well done art team, you are close to the only department that keeps me here.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
401 posts
3,834 battles
On 1/16/2020 at 10:56 PM, lovelacebeer said:

Very true the level of detail in the models is truly beautiful, I admit I often enjoy exploring the ships in my port checking out all the little details.

 

I do the same. For anyone interested in ships, these models can be quite educational. For example, the different methods of stowing anchors in early 20th century ships - compare Diana with Bogatyr. There are also some very interesting details if you look closely for them -  the Diana has a 'monorail' running above the deck on both sides, to convey ammunition to the guns. The T2 Russian cruiser Novik has a pair of small field guns secured to the deck, presumably to be used by landing parties. All fascinating stuff.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SINT]
Players
850 posts
20,548 battles

While the details are great i find this line of cruisers the most ugly cruiser line we have now. Compared with French, Italians and then Japanese and Russian ships they are sure bulky..

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
85 posts
3,808 battles

Uh... the thought occurs... well, I know there’s a ton of specialist kits, etched brass etc out there, some being a total sod to get hold of or out of print - but with so many 3D models out there in WG’s archives, have they ever considered making kits? Or licensing some via third parties?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
401 posts
3,834 battles
4 minutes ago, Fodder1978 said:

Uh... the thought occurs... well, I know there’s a ton of specialist kits, etched brass etc out there, some being a total sod to get hold of or out of print - but with so many 3D models out there in WG’s archives, have they ever considered making kits? Or licensing some via third parties?

WG did have some kind of commercial partnership with one of the main plastic kit manufacturers ( Hasegawa ? Italieri maybe ? ), but there's nothing in the Wargaming store now.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OOPZ]
Players
10 posts
2,421 battles

Agreed, the artists of WG are some of the best in the business, as others have mentioned, i have used more hours in the port than i like to admit🙈 stunning work! Designers table tends to be my favourite "port view", but, I would absolutely love a kind of designers table, but with a cleaner look, and maybe a bit more lighting, to cater to the "look at ALL the details" mode..😜

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BAD-A]
Players
640 posts
9,038 battles
1 hour ago, Fodder1978 said:

Uh... the thought occurs... well, I know there’s a ton of specialist kits, etched brass etc out there, some being a total sod to get hold of or out of print - but with so many 3D models out there in WG’s archives, have they ever considered making kits? Or licensing some via third parties?

That would be good - especially for 3D printing they should be able to get good results with their models.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,075 posts
12,563 battles
4 hours ago, Jvd2000 said:

While the details are great i find this line of cruisers the most ugly cruiser line we have now. Compared with French, Italians and then Japanese and Russian ships they are sure bulky..

It's called being sea worthy something that the game doesn't take into account, and considering the RN had to cover most of the globe having your ships able to handle any storms will be much more important than to let say the Italians that only operated in the Mediterranean Sea.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WGB]
Community Contributor
2,148 posts
28,881 battles
1 hour ago, Chaos_Umbra said:

It's called being sea worthy something that the game doesn't take into account, and considering the RN had to cover most of the globe having your ships able to handle any storms will be much more important than to let say the Italians that only operated in the Mediterranean Sea.

Superb reply, giving chaos_umbra some valuable education.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[O-R-P]
Players
2,178 posts
20,403 battles

Interesting did this models had easter eggs like Koala on Perth or canvas with text on Graf Spee?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
85 posts
3,808 battles
11 hours ago, Chaos_Umbra said:

It's called being sea worthy something that the game doesn't take into account, and considering the RN had to cover most of the globe having your ships able to handle any storms will be much more important than to let say the Italians that only operated in the Mediterranean Sea.

On that side-topic, yesterday I saw some old archive footage of Repulse, Hood and KGV at sea - so old it was totally stained yellow. They were shipping heavy seas with Repulse wet, Hood almost a submarine, and KGV very wet. The Royal Navy had a fixation with being able to fire flat at point blank range, so many capital ships did not have a flared bow.

 

The Hood’s wetness allegedly led to her having the highest TB incidence in the whole fleet...

 

Anyway, sea handling isn’t really part of WoWs, else you’d have turrets and secondaries you can’t fire and DDs that would be barely able to do half speed, let alone fire torps. Could be interesting, though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GRK3N]
[GRK3N]
Players
1,171 posts
6,284 battles

Am I the only one that thinks Goliath looks absolutely terrible? Its way out of proportions, its too short and way too tall. Doesnt look remotely like anything that would ever sail the seas in real life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TPF-]
Players
3,828 posts
15,755 battles
53 minutes ago, Floofz said:

Am I the only one that thinks Goliath looks absolutely terrible? Its way out of proportions, its too short and way too tall. Doesnt look remotely like anything that would ever sail the seas in real life.

It looks like Vanguard with a tower-block brutalist bridge. That is quite British, but I agree it looks way too tall for its beam.

 

There are few annoyances with the high Tier cruisers (and the event) - Goliath is too tall, Albemarle has the wrong secondary turrets (should be the ones on Lightning or Jutland, which Drake has).  And to be really finicky - the poster behind the container opening screen says that the Royal Navy is made in England (about half of it being made in Scotland) and - worst of all - on the RN Directive screen there is a cup of tea without milk. I don't know who that officer is supposed to be, but I suspect he is a spy for the Boche.....

 

1 hour ago, Fodder1978 said:

Anyway, sea handling isn’t really part of WoWs, else you’d have turrets and secondaries you can’t fire and DDs that would be barely able to do half speed, let alone fire torps. Could be interesting, though...

It's not, but clearly the ships look the way they do because of real-world considerations. It's why the KGV class had nearly double the designed range of a Bismarck... they had to keep slogging out to Ceylon, Singapore and Australia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,075 posts
12,563 battles
15 hours ago, Fodder1978 said:

On that side-topic, yesterday I saw some old archive footage of Repulse, Hood and KGV at sea - so old it was totally stained yellow. They were shipping heavy seas with Repulse wet, Hood almost a submarine, and KGV very wet. The Royal Navy had a fixation with being able to fire flat at point blank range, so many capital ships did not have a flared bow.

 

The Hood’s wetness allegedly led to her having the highest TB incidence in the whole fleet...

 

Anyway, sea handling isn’t really part of WoWs, else you’d have turrets and secondaries you can’t fire and DDs that would be barely able to do half speed, let alone fire torps. Could be interesting, though...

The reason why Hood was known as the biggest submarine in the RN was cause the design was changed during construction due to what happened at the Battle of Jutland with all those Battle Cruisers Detonating so the Engineers increased Hood's Deck armour, obviously this affected the weight of the ship and thus how high it sat in the water, which is why the aft deck was seen almost completely submerged in any sort of rough seas. And yes you are correct about the crew of the Hood suffering a lot from TB.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TALOS]
Players
126 posts
2,658 battles
On 1/18/2020 at 5:27 PM, Jvd2000 said:

While the details are great i find this line of cruisers the most ugly cruiser line we have now. Compared with French, Italians and then Japanese and Russian ships they are sure bulky..

like US they have to operate in ocean and in grate distances. So they haven't grate speed but endurance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SINT]
Players
850 posts
20,548 battles
6 hours ago, Agis_D said:

like US they have to operate in ocean and in grate distances. So they haven't grate speed but endurance.

It seems that Japan managed both. At the cost of being overweight. 
 

My problem with UK CA is that they are neither good looking nor have a usefull contribution to the game. What is their function in the game since other nations simply do better. 
 

Basic: why would i pick an  ( imo ugly) UK CA when the current existing cruisers are just better. No disrespect against the historical contribution by the Royal Navy but this line brings nothing extra to the game.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×