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

Italian BB's

28 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[EUROF]
[EUROF]
Beta Tester
324 posts
18,947 battles

Dear Wargaming staff and fellow players,

 

Long ago WG promised to introduce the Italian BB line.

Since then a lot of other classes have been added to the game, and no word about the Italian BB's anymore.

Will they be added at all, or are things like subs far more important ?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[INTRO]
[INTRO]
Players
1,447 posts
19,332 battles

Italian BBs will come. Keep in mind that it have taken five years to get this far. "Rome wasn't built in a day."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ONE2]
Players
3,144 posts
24,050 battles

Yeeah, I'd very much like to see them too, as well as Italian DD's... BUT MOST OF ALL IJN TONE!!! :Smile-angry:

 

Oh well, perhaps before we all all die of old age or sheer frustration eh?:Smile_great:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JRM]
[JRM]
Players
7,618 posts

IMHO the RM BB line will be either the final line in this years cycle or the one before that, depending on the actuall plans for subs in randoms...

 

Anyways that would put them either around october (anniversary patch +-1) or december (Chrismas patch +-1) with full vs early access beeing one month apart

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TPF-]
Players
4,535 posts
18,823 battles

I think the problem is that they've not worked out how to make the Italian battleships different without being OP (Guilio Cesare) or poor (Roma). The Impero experiment with SAP sounds like another product of the DD (Destroyer Destruction) department and I suspect won't make it to live, but I can't see there being much interest in a new line of battleships which look good but don't perform, so working out what their USP is will be the key.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
462 posts
12,065 battles
6 minutes ago, invicta2012 said:

I think the problem is that they've not worked out how to make the Italian battleships different without being OP (Guilio Cesare) or poor (Roma). The Impero experiment with SAP sounds like another product of the DD (Destroyer Destruction) department and I suspect won't make it to live, but I can't see there being much interest in a new line of battleships which look good but don't perform, so working out what their USP is will be the key.

Here's an idea, stop making everything different! There's no real reason each line has to be different.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TPF-]
Players
4,535 posts
18,823 battles
10 minutes ago, Todger_Fairmile said:

Here's an idea, stop making everything different! There's no real reason each line has to be different.

Well, there is.... it would be quite dull. I think WG frequently goes too far down the road of gimmickry for the sake of difference - I'd happily take some Italian cruisers with sensible ammunition - but I can see why they think each line has to bring something fresh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
462 posts
12,065 battles
16 minutes ago, invicta2012 said:

Well, there is.... it would be quite dull. I think WG frequently goes too far down the road of gimmickry for the sake of difference - I'd happily take some Italian cruisers with sensible ammunition - but I can see why they think each line has to bring something fresh.

There's a difference between fresh, and different just for the sake of being different. I'd rather have something worth playing than gimmickie. In any case what kind of idiot thinks there's a need for more German CV's? There are several legitimate lines of ships that could be included in the game, with Italian BB's at or near the front. I would even say that in the name of equity, that WG could give the Russians a premium CV (there must have been ONE design out there). But I can't really see justification for an entire German (or Russian for that matter) CV line except shaking money from gullible fools.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SICK]
Weekend Tester
5,141 posts
11,207 battles

There's really no need to have them be any fundamentally different than the Roma and Cesare:

Compound belt armor of reasonable thickness, great armor plating that reward angling, good concealment and maneuverability.
All that at the tradeoff of below average AA/secondaries, poor survivability if caught off guard, below average range, no special consumable or special repair party.

 

The fantastic mid to low range hit, tank a bit and run ship, akin to French ships, but more emphasis on tanking, and less on speed.

 

 

As long as you don't go overboard with every single strength (like the Cesare), and don't give a crippling unreliability (like the Roma), both those ships show that the concept is reasonable and fun to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TPF-]
Players
4,535 posts
18,823 battles
7 minutes ago, Exocet6951 said:

As long as you don't go overboard with every single strength (like the Cesare), and don't give a crippling unreliability (like the Roma), both those ships show that the concept is reasonable and fun to play.

I'd hope so, but I suspect the reaction to the British heavy cruisers will have an impact on their thinking about another line of balanced ships: people make such quick judgements and anything not necessarily obviously better than what already exists gets marked as "trash".  It seems very much as if players like what would be min/max characters in other games - they have really obvious weaknesses, but are really strong if you can circumvent those. Soviet BBs would be the best example, but there are plenty of others. That said, I fear what we'll get with Italian BBs is a cross between Monarch and Gorizia -  good concealment and SAP to smash up DDs and Cruisers, but lacking punch against heavier ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,456 posts
9,251 battles
21 minutes ago, Exocet6951 said:

There's really no need to have them be any fundamentally different than the Roma and Cesare:

Compound belt armor of reasonable thickness, great armor plating that reward angling, good concealment and maneuverability.
All that at the tradeoff of below average AA/secondaries, poor survivability if caught off guard, below average range, no special consumable or repair party.

You hopefully mean no special repair party, not no repair party, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SICK]
Weekend Tester
5,141 posts
11,207 battles
3 minutes ago, Bunny_Lover_Kallen said:

You hopefully mean no special repair party, not no repair party, right?

 

Yes, no special repair party, I'll edit my post to make it clearer.

 

 

18 minutes ago, invicta2012 said:

I'd hope so, but I suspect the reaction to the British heavy cruisers will have an impact on their thinking about another line of balanced ships: people make such quick judgements and anything not necessarily obviously better than what already exists gets marked as "trash".  It seems very much as if players like what would be min/max characters in other games - they have really obvious weaknesses, but are really strong if you can circumvent those. Soviet BBs would be the best example, but there are plenty of others. That said, I fear what we'll get with Italian BBs is a cross between Monarch and Gorizia -  good concealment and SAP to smash up DDs and Cruisers, but lacking punch against heavier ships.

 

That's a good point, although British CAs get their tankiness from a repair party, rather than the ship itself. That's a rather conditional tankiness, which I think was part of the rather tepid reception.
Tankiness on cruisers tends to come with a very big 'IF' statement. Like the Hindy, 'IF the shell hits the turtleback' , or RN CAs 'IF the shells aren't all citpens'.
BBs don't really have that problem, as long as they cross a certain plating threshold and basic belt armor threshold (ie: anything more than 300mm).

I hope WG takes a reasonable approach, because the last non-gimmick, good all rounder BB branch we got was the USN branch.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-HUN-]
[-HUN-]
Players
1,631 posts
11,472 battles
3 hours ago, Yedwy said:

IMHO the RM BB line will be either the final line in this years cycle or the one before that, depending on the actuall plans for subs in randoms...

 

Anyways that would put them either around october (anniversary patch +-1) or december (Chrismas patch +-1) with full vs early access beeing one month apart

So naive.

This year? Nyet Komrad, we need one more excellent RU BB line first!

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JRM]
[JRM]
Players
7,618 posts

I dont remember WG mentioning anything about new VMF BB line even on the sidelines?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
784 posts
10,998 battles
2 hours ago, invicta2012 said:

Well, there is.... it would be quite dull. I think WG frequently goes too far down the road of gimmickry for the sake of difference - I'd happily take some Italian cruisers with sensible ammunition - but I can see why they think each line has to bring something fresh.

The USP should be that they are Italian Battleships.
Sadly WeeGee have gone the route of "everything must be different in gameplay in some fashion" so they've handicapped themselves.

Just imagine a game where there were only historical ships with all of their multitude of differences, all based in facts... rather than paper-tigers out of the Sovietski Dream Machine.

I mean, who would want to buy into that eh?

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[EUROF]
[EUROF]
Beta Tester
324 posts
18,947 battles
23 hours ago, Hanse77SWE said:

Italian BBs will come. Keep in mind that it have taken five years to get this far. "Rome wasn't built in a day."

 

Italian BB's was talked about by WarGaming in 2017.

Subs was talked about in 2019.

Now it's 2020

No Italian BB's, but yes we have Subs. (They promised to never implement in the game).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[INTRO]
[INTRO]
Players
1,447 posts
19,332 battles
6 minutes ago, Evergreen said:

 

Italian BB's was talked about by WarGaming in 2017.

Subs was talked about in 2019.

Now it's 2020

No Italian BB's, but yes we have Subs. (They promised to never implement in the game).

Subs was talked about in 2015. As soon as the game went live people started asking for it. (Not me.)

And you should've learned by now that WG doesn't take advice or requests from anyone. They only dance to their own fiddle. Also they never answer with a date when asked even if they know it's comming. Hence the famous "Soon". They can say "We don't have a date for that" one week and the next week they anounce the whole thing.

 

TLDR; Why ask when you know they won't answer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CR33D]
[CR33D]
Players
3,243 posts
30,033 battles
23 hours ago, Exocet6951 said:

That's a good point, although British CAs get their tankiness from a repair party, rather than the ship itself. That's a rather conditional tankiness, which I think was part of the rather tepid reception.
Tankiness on cruisers tends to come with a very big 'IF' statement. Like the Hindy, 'IF the shell hits the turtleback' , or RN CAs 'IF the shells aren't all citpens'.
BBs don't really have that problem, as long as they cross a certain plating threshold and basic belt armor threshold (ie: anything more than 300mm).

 

RN CA "tankiness" never meant to be better resistance on AP shells but actually on HE shells. That is a point of Goliath 40mm deck, to be resistant on HE spam as neither 6inch guns with IFHE or 8inch guns without it could pen it. And superheal was there to negate fire damage. So, on paper, RN cruisers, at least T10, should good to fight HE spammers, not to brawl BBs, even tho Goliath has pretty good belt armour for cruiser. But it still only have 25mm bow armour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TPF-]
Players
4,535 posts
18,823 battles
21 hours ago, Starchy_Tuber said:

The USP should be that they are Italian Battleships.
Sadly WeeGee have gone the route of "everything must be different in gameplay in some fashion" so they've handicapped themselves.

Just imagine a game where there were only historical ships with all of their multitude of differences, all based in facts... rather than paper-tigers out of the Sovietski Dream Machine.

Weeeelll..... I suppose my example would be the USS Wichita. An interesting, unique ship, whose in-game version is as simple and uncomplicated as it can be. There's nothing min/max about it. It has decent guns, armour that works, AA which does a job, an OK health pool. It can dodge, it's stealthy, it has a versatile load of consumables - radar, hydro, spotter, DFAA - and almost no-one plays it, because it sits smack bang in the middle of the pack for almost everything. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[EUROF]
[EUROF]
Beta Tester
324 posts
18,947 battles
11 hours ago, Hanse77SWE said:

Subs was talked about in 2015. As soon as the game went live people started asking for it. (Not me.)

And you should've learned by now that WG doesn't take advice or requests from anyone. They only dance to their own fiddle. Also they never answer with a date when asked even if they know it's comming. Hence the famous "Soon". They can say "We don't have a date for that" one week and the next week they anounce the whole thing.

 

TLDR; Why ask when you know they won't answer?

 

Subs where talked about by players, and WG said then they won't implement them.

However, WG said they wanted to add the Italian BB's asap, 2017.

Now we get the subs, but still have to wait for the Italian BB's.

 

Asking myself now, how trustworthy is what WG says ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[EUROF]
[EUROF]
Beta Tester
324 posts
18,947 battles
8 hours ago, invicta2012 said:

Weeeelll..... I suppose my example would be the USS Wichita. An interesting, unique ship, whose in-game version is as simple and uncomplicated as it can be. There's nothing min/max about it. It has decent guns, armour that works, AA which does a job, an OK health pool. It can dodge, it's stealthy, it has a versatile load of consumables - radar, hydro, spotter, DFAA - and almost no-one plays it, because it sits smack bang in the middle of the pack for almost everything. 

 

Hmmm, interesting.

Since when is the Wichita a Italian BB ?

Seems a bit offtopic ?!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TPF-]
Players
4,535 posts
18,823 battles
17 minutes ago, Evergreen said:

Hmmm, interesting.

Since when is the Wichita a Italian BB ?

Seems a bit offtopic ?!?

Hello old chap. It's part of a discussion about whether Italian BBs should be relatively straightforward or have a gimmick/"national flavour".  We were talking about existing ships and whether people actually prefer the straightforward. The Wichita was an example of a very good, very plain ship that no-one seems to play.

 

 

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×