How would you feel about adding a gun larger than 18" to the game

[Affeks]

We probably all know wargamings statement on this topic, but I'm still curious.

[OVanBruce]

Where is the option "no, because I don't find it neccesary"?

[Affeks]

Where is the option "no, because I don't find it neccesary"?

 

Added 

[Affeks]

Can someone fill me inn on why it would be unnecessary?

[Gleb_Reawer]

Uhh... This is like asking "Should WG implement Deathstar Mk.II with 500 base pen and 3000 avg damage to WoT?"

 

Power creep will happen, no need to ask for it in advance

[Nargoth73]

Can someone fill me inn on why it would be unnecessary?

 

Maybe you should first fill us in on why you think it would be necessary. For me, I wouldn't care one way or the other. As long as the guns are "realisitic" I am fine with any calibre.

[OVanBruce]

Can someone fill me inn on why it would be unnecessary?

 

It adds nothing in terms of gameplay variety, just a bigger number in an screen. On the other hand, all ships would need to have its health and  armor rebalanced around the new weapon, all for nothing.

[mk_sky]

"Go big or go home!" ... it is then.

I mean who doesn't want guns that rips DDs apart if the shell just lands in a 50m radius (or so) ... well at least not me.

[RamirezKurita]

As long as the guns and the ship carrying them fit within the time period and displacements we already have, then I'm fine with it. Larger calibre guns will always come with their own advantages and disadvantages. Either way, the only ships that I am aware of that were ever planned to have bigger guns than the Yamato class's 46cm guns are some of the inter war IJN capital ships, the RN Incomparables and the later German H-class designs (which are too large to fit within the 70,000ish tonnes of the current crop of T10 battleships so they can be discounted).

[Affeks]

 

It adds nothing in terms of gameplay variety, just a bigger number in an screen. On the other hand, all ships would need to have its health and  armor rebalanced around the new weapon, all for nothing.

 

I disagree,

bigger guns = less guns

More guns = better against unarmored targets, better HE spam, less severe when losing a turret, usually better traverse and potential for higher ROF

Bigger guns = better penetration, better alpha damage, more turret armor

Lets bring in Mrs Yamato, she basically penetrates everything which makes her the queen of BBs, but because she has so many guns she still dominates many cruisers and some DDs. If let's say the later version of the A-150 was added (70 000 tons and 3x2 20"), it could wreak havoc on Yamato and basically add a new layer of BB action, but it would be weak to DDs and would be less effective vs. Cruisers. I don't think the game would need a rebalance as it is as easily countered as many other ships. Ships using the guns would have their quirks, their own strenght and weaknesses just like most ships.

[EsaTuunanen]

Could as well ask them to add nuclear shells for USN BBs with 16" guns.

Which were actually produced in one time...

Unlike so many completely paper things in this game.

[Affeks]

Could as well ask them to add nuclear shells for USN BBs with 16" guns.

Which were actually produced in one time...

Unlike so many completely paper things in this game.

 

I can understand why you don't want paper ships, but this ships is all about what ifs. Since when were soviet and IJN ships fighting alongside eachother against USN and Kriegsmarine ships?

[GrossadmiralThrawn]

 

I can understand why you don't want paper ships, but this ships is all about what ifs. Since when were soviet and IJN and USN and RN and KMS ships fighting alongside eachother against USN and Kriegsmarine and IJN and soviet and RN ships?

 

ftfy

[Aotearas]

The real question would be which ship that would mount such weapons should be introduced in WoWS and how could you balance it.

[OVanBruce]

Or you could rebalance Yamato, which the devs are already doing, instead of adding a whole new gun that would need to be taken into account for balancing and that would probably be used by no one except the big guns fetichists since the 460mm guns work well enough against almost everything. The amount of grief and flame a rebalance of the whole high tier balance (which is already in flames) it's definetly not worth it.

[Affeks]

The real question would be which ship that would mount such weapons should be introduced in WoWS and how could you balance it.

 

I'm discussing it on other threads, but the later and more realistic A-150 designs would fit perfectly I think. 

 

It's about 70 000 tons, about same as Montana and Yamato

Armed with 3×2 20" guns 2 fore 1 aft

So in short less guns, better AA and less ROF than yamato so potentially better against BBs and CVs but weaker against CAs and DDs

[Aotearas]

 

I'm discussing it on other threads, but the later and more realistic A-150 designs would fit perfectly I think. 

 

It's about 70 000 tons, about same as Montana and Yamato

Armed with 3×2 20" guns 2 fore 1 aft

So in short less guns, better AA and less ROF than yamato so potentially better against BBs and CVs but weaker against CAs and DDs

 

Considering the Montana vs Yamato balance is out of whack despite the theoretical DPM advantages of the former, I'd pass.

[Affeks]

 

Considering the Montana vs Yamato balance is out of whack despite the theoretical DPM advantages of the former, I'd pass.

 

what I expected from Yamato in game was to have big, slow guns that penetrates everything it touches (and overpenetrates) yet difficult to use against smaller targets, yet what I got was a ship that had every advantage over Montana and still crapon Cruisers and DDs because of normal rate of fire and the sheer number of main battery guns. I agree the t10 BB balance is crapATM, but the A-150's 20" guns would take Yamatos weaknesses to the extreme. Therefore I think the A-150 would actually be more balanced than Yamato in her current state... don't you think?

This is all speculation for the long run, I don't expect to see anything close to a second ijn line for many years to come.

[Kurbain]

Even though the amount of barrels would be a lower on a ship with 20" guns, I'm not sure if the implementation of a ship with such a caliber would be a good idea.

BBs already have issues dealing with the 18" shells of the Yamato.

 

I doubt it would enhance gameplay to introduce a ship with guns that have an easier time penetrating ships at every possible angle than even those of the Yamato.

[Slargmann]

Even though the amount of barrels would be a lower on a ship with 20" guns, I'm not sure if the implementation of a ship with such a caliber would be a good idea.

BBs already have issues dealing with the 18" shells of the Yamato.

 

I doubt it would enhance gameplay to introduce a ship with guns that have an easier time penetrating ships at every possible angle than even those of the Yamato.

 

What if they had something like 60s reload time? Could at the very least be interesting.

[Perrinu]

I would want the option purely for the fact I would love to sail the concept battle cruiser HMS Incomparable as a tier 10 British BC.

[txtspeak]

whatever ship could have bigger guns than the yamato. historically. I find that kinda hard to believe that such a gun even existed

[Historynerd]

I would want the option purely for the fact I would love to sail the concept battle cruiser HMS Incomparable as a tier 10 British BC.

 

No offense, but if you want to sail an enormous ship, armed with powerful but slow-firing guns (which IRL would have almost wrecked the ship after the fourth salvo, or something like that), fast but quite underarmoured (so much that even heavy cruisers might pierce its belt in ideal circumstances).... it's all yours.

 

I'd rather sail something more balanced.

[RamirezKurita]

 

No offense, but if you want to sail an enormous ship, armed with powerful but slow-firing guns (which IRL would have almost wrecked the ship after the fourth salvo, or something like that), fast but quite underarmoured (so much that even heavy cruisers might pierce its belt in ideal circumstances).... it's all yours.

 

I'd rather sail something more balanced.

 

To be fair, the Incomparables really aren't T10 material, if anything they are closer to T7-8 by virtue of being a relatively large late-WWI design similar to the Amagis, Nagatos and Colorados. At those tiers, it would basically be citadel city for everyone involved, which would actually make it relatively interesting to play as it would be taking the unarmoured concept of the battlecruiser to an extreme.

[Historynerd]

To be fair, the Incomparables really aren't T10 material, if anything they are closer to T7-8 by virtue of being a relatively large late-WWI design similar to the Amagis, Nagatos and Colorados. At those tiers, it would basically be citadel city for everyone involved, which would actually make it relatively interesting to play as it would be taking the unarmoured concept of the battlecruiser to an extreme.

 

Could they be balanced for those Tiers, considering that their alpha would be rather ludicrous? Without resorting to things like the one proposed by Slargmann, i.e. 60 seconds reload?