Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Fino_93

english-russian cruiser swap

  

61 members have voted

  1. 1. would you like the swap between this nations?

    • yes
      13
    • no
      46
    • yes but with some differencies from your concept
      1
    • maybe
      1

43 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[FGT]
Players
390 posts
7,643 battles

ok, i've read enough things here to be sure that this RN thing is a failure, not a real gameplay failure (it's just too early to say this), but still a delusion for many.

I've read sort of changes like removing AP from russians CL, but i find it as a sort of drastic change, so i think to somewhat that is, in my opinion, more balanced: we have to swap the roles of the lines.

 

Let me explain: "Russian cruisers line concept" is most formed by light cruisers and, as "demi-unique-trait", has the radar, in par with americans, in my opinion that's EXACTLY what british light cruisers should be.

On the other side, russian cruisers ships are most non existent, and that's make them fantastic, in my opinion, for experiment the new concept, cause if you have to invent something that doesn't exist, you can invent it as you want.

Plus, there's the "little" fact that rn was a major naval power and it's so sad to see that it's guns have a so bad ballistic while the russian "not-being-a-so-interested-in-the-navy" could be well represented with this.

 

 

so, this is an idea that could work:

 

-RN line reworked to fit the russian "place in  the game" with CL that can spam HE or AP volleys with good arcs and precision given by its naval culture, with radar given by the fact that they were almost the first and probably the most to use it in effective way and planes cause they simply had them.

-RU line reworked to fit the british place, with bad arcs and precision cause their cannons were not so good, balanced with the magical AP shell with the current RN stats that avoids overpens and ricochets, btw their being "simple" ships make them very easy to be repaired at sea, so you have the repair consumable, and, having them planes catapult i think we can let the line to take the plane instead of the smoke.

 

What do you think?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SAD-]
Beta Tester, Players
751 posts
8,192 battles

ok, i've read enough things here to be sure that this RN thing is a failure, not a real gameplay failure (it's just too early to say this), but still a delusion for many.

I've read sort of changes like removing AP from russians CL, but i find it as a sort of drastic change, so i think to somewhat that is, in my opinion, more balanced: we have to swap the roles of the lines.

 

Let me explain: "Russian cruisers line concept" is most formed by light cruisers and, as "demi-unique-trait", has the radar, in par with americans, in my opinion that's EXACTLY what british light cruisers should be.

On the other side, russian cruisers ships are most non existent, and that's make them fantastic, in my opinion, for experiment the new concept, cause if you have to invent something that doesn't exist, you can invent it as you want.

Plus, there's the "little" fact that rn was a major naval power and it's so sad to see that it's guns have a so bad ballistic while the russian "not-being-a-so-interested-in-the-navy" could be well represented with this.

 

 

so, this is an idea that could work:

 

-RN line reworked to fit the russian "place in  the game" with CL that can spam HE or AP volleys with good arcs and precision given by its naval culture, with radar given by the fact that they were almost the first and probably the most to use it in effective way and planes cause they simply had them.

-RU line reworked to fit the british place, with bad arcs and precision cause their cannons were not so good, balanced with the magical AP shell with the current RN stats that avoids overpens and ricochets, btw their being "simple" ships make them very easy to be repaired at sea, so you have the repair consumable, and, having them planes catapult i think we can let the line to take the plane instead of the smoke.

 

What do you think?

 

56249551.jpg
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ST-EU]
Supertester
2,062 posts
3,890 battles

^Sadly, the same can't be said about Russian ship designs.

 

To the OP. No. Russian ship designs of that period wasn't bad, it is simply a case of not enough of them to fill a tech tree. This is also somewhat the curse of designing ships with a gimmick in mind, as the best tools often gets taken by the first few lines. And to completely rebalance an existing line is not a good idea, and would only lead to confusion and players that aren't very happy.

Edited by Vogel
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quality Poster
1,688 posts
9,166 battles

I'm having fun with the RN cruisers right now, so.. No thanks..

Plus the uproar, seriously, no.

Plus they won't do it, cos the Russian fanbase would be livid, as well as basically everyone who has these ships already and would need to completely relearn them..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SAD-]
Beta Tester, Players
751 posts
8,192 battles

I'm having fun with the RN cruisers right now, so.. No thanks..

Plus the uproar, seriously, no.

Plus they won't do it, cos the Russian fanbase would be livid, as well as basically everyone who has these ships already and would need to completely relearn them..

 

3793936.jpg

 

Well I'm finding the British Cruisers great fun as they are...

 

PS

 

She was Stock as well

 

3794706.jpg

 

3794708.jpg

 

Game just now in the Leander :honoring: I have no problems with her... Think the RN line is unique and great to play

Edited by Ivanovich_Rudakov
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[X-MAS]
Players
167 posts
8,286 battles

I would like to sincerely that mikhail kutuzov returned to be the ship that I bought ... because after each date nature to get worse each time.

It was never very agile but it was definitely playable, now it has the absurd agilta a battelships liv 6 American, the armor of an Orban and the guns of the same caliber of Cleveland, with a range of 19.1 km from fuorco is just para also identified by the moon .... 12% of basic ignite possibility that once in game translates if it fits in a 10% maximum but most of the time if you have a hit of 7% is a miracle ... .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SAD-]
Beta Tester, Players
751 posts
8,192 battles

No thanks Russia can keep their fantasy ships.

 

Like the Mass of Neptunes and Minotaur classes the British had.... on Paper...

 

Never mind :) If you guys fail to make the British line work then that is your own faults... I'm (No surprise) a Russian Ship fan... but I can make the British line work.....

 

Lets be honest you Limies want a class of ship that when you hit the Battle button you Automatically get top place on your team with a win every game... tough! You want a victory... earn it like I have posted... to do well with the British line involves brains and forward thinking.... maybe that is why the majority of cry babies that come on the forum cannot make this class of ship work!

 

The Royal navy was a major force until 20 years ago... but what made them great? The ships? no! It was the crew.. the officers who used there brains to achieve great things from small odds.. Maybe blame your own stupidities not the ships.... but why learn to master a class of ship when it's easier to come and whine like little babies on the forums!

 

269fa226ea55ad028164bcab79c38aab.gif

Edited by Ivanovich_Rudakov
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AWF-]
Players
1,196 posts
6,602 battles

 

Like the Mass of Neptunes and Minotaur classes the British had.... on Paper...

 

Never mind :) If you guys fail to make the British line work then that is your own faults... I'm (No surprise) a Russian Ship fan... but I can make the British line work.....

 

Lets be honest you Limies want a class of ship that when you hit the Battle button you Automatically get top place on your team with a win every game... tough! You want a victory... earn it like I have posted... to do well with the British line involves brains and forward thinking.... maybe that is why the majority of cry babies that come on the forum cannot make this class of ship work!

 

The Royal navy was a major force until 20 years ago... but what made them great? The ships? no! It was the crew.. the officers who used there brains to achieve great things from small odds.. Maybe blame your own stupidities not the ships.... but why learn to m,aster a class of ship when it's easier to come and whine like little babies on the forums!

 

 

 

Master trolling there, Sir.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SAD-]
Beta Tester, Players
751 posts
8,192 battles

 

Master trolling there, Sir.

 

 

 

I do not agree with your Russophic rant.. that makes me the troll for clearly defending the class of ship is ok? Shows you come here beating your Anti Russian drum when you provided nothing to this post.. I have provided Screenshots showing the British Cruisers work and are fine to play...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
391 posts

ok, i've read enough things here to be sure that this RN thing is a failure, not a real gameplay failure (it's just too early to say this), but still a delusion for many.

I've read sort of changes like removing AP from russians CL, but i find it as a sort of drastic change, so i think to somewhat that is, in my opinion, more balanced: we have to swap the roles of the lines.

 

Let me explain: "Russian cruisers line concept" is most formed by light cruisers and, as "demi-unique-trait", has the radar, in par with americans, in my opinion that's EXACTLY what british light cruisers should be.

On the other side, russian cruisers ships are most non existent, and that's make them fantastic, in my opinion, for experiment the new concept, cause if you have to invent something that doesn't exist, you can invent it as you want.

Plus, there's the "little" fact that rn was a major naval power and it's so sad to see that it's guns have a so bad ballistic while the russian "not-being-a-so-interested-in-the-navy" could be well represented with this.

 

 

so, this is an idea that could work:

 

-RN line reworked to fit the russian "place in  the game" with CL that can spam HE or AP volleys with good arcs and precision given by its naval culture, with radar given by the fact that they were almost the first and probably the most to use it in effective way and planes cause they simply had them.

-RU line reworked to fit the british place, with bad arcs and precision cause their cannons were not so good, balanced with the magical AP shell with the current RN stats that avoids overpens and ricochets, btw their being "simple" ships make them very easy to be repaired at sea, so you have the repair consumable, and, having them planes catapult i think we can let the line to take the plane instead of the smoke.

 

What do you think?

 

Arcs will probably never change as shell velocity is pretty much non-negotiable as balance factor so far. You're not gonna replace the flat arcs with crapones on the VMF line unless you gut gun stats used like 152mm/57 1938, which actually had a very good shell speed coming out the muzzle (950 mps for AP, SAP, and Distance Grenade, 800 mps for shrapnel shell).

 

Both USN and RN all went for slower, heavier shells to achieve plunging fire,  which is a very good design decision IRL.

 

Only in an arcade setting where ships respond near instantaneously to the helm, you can track shells midair, and reduced firing ranges do high shell velocity/flat arcs becomes the end all be all in gun ballistics.

Edited by byronicasian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AWF-]
Players
1,196 posts
6,602 battles

 

I do not agree with your Russophic rant.. that makes me the troll for clearly defending the class of ship is ok? Shows you come here beating your Anti Russian drum when you provided nothing to this post.. I have provided Screenshots showing the British Cruisers work and are fine to play...

 

Except a screenshot do not say ANYTHING about how the ships do on avarage. Rather, it is a way to fool players.

 

Let us take a look at the first five Tiers, this is from NA. You might THINK that this shows that the RN cruisers are kind of good, but if you do read the stats from the first release of RU cruisers. 

 

nation class tier name players  
win exp damage
caused
JP CA 1 Hashidate 143 49.53 438 4968
KM CA 1 Hermelin 262 50.32 406 4496
RN CA 1 Black Swan 887 49.28 408 5613
SN CA 1 Orlan 181 48.29 432 4655
US CA 1 Erie 249 49.59 373 3340
               
JP CA 2 Chikuma 302 45.87 422 11272
KM CA 2 Dresden 536 48.76 438 12818
RN CA 2 Weymouth 801 41.56 403 13241
SN CA 2 Novik 120 41.01 414 11560
US CA 2 Chester 515 43.18 379 9077
               
JP CA 3 Tenryu 927 49.38 543 18002
KM CA 3 Kolberg 1289 47.81 498 15353
RN CA 3 Caledon 2920 49.98 563 19397
SN CA 3 Bogatyr 555 52.39 552 22948
US CA 3 St. Louis 2351 51.08 526 20854
               
JP CA 4 Kuma 1043 48.75 577 18686
KM CA 4 Karlsruhe 1478 48.9 554 16225
RN CA 4 Danae 1579 50.18 680 21987
SN CA 4 Svietlana 805 49.29 604 19966
US CA 4 Phoenix 1526 47.95 537 15628
               
JP CA 5 Furutaka 921 48.97 730 20310
KM CA 5 Koenigsberg 2306 49.09 781 23272
RN CA 5 Emerald 613 49.11 928 25308
SN CA 5 Kirov 689 47.29 767 23124
US CA 5 Omaha 1626 47.72 685 17830

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DREAD]
Players
454 posts
8,394 battles

I realise I am one of the very few voices from the wilderness, but I am loving the Brits. Being of that nation myself I eagerly awaited there arrival.

 

Emerald is a bit of a louse, but all the others I have played (up to Leander so far) have been much fun. Sure, tough to begin with, a hugely steep learning curve, but I do enjoy a challenge.

 

Only thing I would change is the dispersion and angle of firing. Those are ridiculous.

 

I would not even say to include the HE, although that would be nice, but I can live without it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SAD-]
Beta Tester, Players
751 posts
8,192 battles

 

Except a screenshot do not say ANYTHING about how the ships do on avarage. Rather, it is a way to fool players.

 

Let us take a look at the first five Tiers, this is from NA. You might THINK that this shows that the RN cruisers are kind of good, but if you do read the stats from the first release of RU cruisers. 

 

nation class tier name players  
win exp damage
caused
JP CA 1 Hashidate 143 49.53 438 4968
KM CA 1 Hermelin 262 50.32 406 4496
RN CA 1 Black Swan 887 49.28 408 5613
SN CA 1 Orlan 181 48.29 432 4655
US CA 1 Erie 249 49.59 373 3340
               
JP CA 2 Chikuma 302 45.87 422 11272
KM CA 2 Dresden 536 48.76 438 12818
RN CA 2 Weymouth 801 41.56 403 13241
SN CA 2 Novik 120 41.01 414 11560
US CA 2 Chester 515 43.18 379 9077
               
JP CA 3 Tenryu 927 49.38 543 18002
KM CA 3 Kolberg 1289 47.81 498 15353
RN CA 3 Caledon 2920 49.98 563 19397
SN CA 3 Bogatyr 555 52.39 552 22948
US CA 3 St. Louis 2351 51.08 526 20854
               
JP CA 4 Kuma 1043 48.75 577 18686
KM CA 4 Karlsruhe 1478 48.9 554 16225
RN CA 4 Danae 1579 50.18 680 21987
SN CA 4 Svietlana 805 49.29 604 19966
US CA 4 Phoenix 1526 47.95 537 15628
               
JP CA 5 Furutaka 921 48.97 730 20310
KM CA 5 Koenigsberg 2306 49.09 781 23272
RN CA 5 Emerald 613 49.11 928 25308
SN CA 5 Kirov 689 47.29 767 23124
US CA 5 Omaha 1626 47.72 685 17830

 

So how come people are playing them ok? I'm far from a professional player yet I enjoy them and seem to do ok with these ships...

 

Oh look the British navy beats the Soviet ships on the Following tiers....

 

RN CA 5 Emerald 613 49.11 928 25308
SN CA 5 Kirov 689 47.29 767 23124

 

RN CA 4 Danae 1579 50.18 680 21987
SN CA 4 Svietlana 805 49.29 604 19966

 

RN CA 2 Weymouth 801 41.56 403 13241
SN CA 2 Novik 120 41.01 414 11560

 

 

Thanks for proving my argument..... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FGT]
Players
390 posts
7,643 battles

 

Arcs will probably never change as shell velocity is pretty much non-negotiable as balance factor so far. You're not gonna replace the flat arcs with crapones on the VMF line unless you gut gun stats used like 152mm/57 1938, which actually had a very good shell speed coming out the muzzle (950 mps for AP, SAP, and Distance Grenade, 800 mps for shrapnel shell).

 

Both USN and RN all went for slower, heavier shells to achieve plunging fire,  which is a very good design decision IRL.

 

Only in an arcade setting where ships respond near instantaneously to the helm, you can track shells midair, and reduced firing ranges do high shell velocity/flat arcs becomes the end all be all in gun ballistics.

 

 

I think that you are the only One that got the menaning of my idea and answered why it would be a Bad decision...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[B0TS]
Beta Tester
1,789 posts
6,430 battles

 

1) Like the Mass of Neptunes and Minotaur classes the British had.... on Paper...

 

2) Lets be honest you Limies want a class of ship that when you hit the Battle button you Automatically get top place on your team with a win every game... tough! You want a victory... earn it like I have posted... to do well with the British line involves brains and forward thinking.... maybe that is why the majority of cry babies that come on the forum cannot make this class of ship work!

 

3) The Royal navy was a major force until 20 years ago... but what made them great? The ships? no! It was the crew.. the officers who used there brains to achieve great things from small odds.. Maybe blame your own stupidities not the ships.... but why learn to master a class of ship when it's easier to come and whine like little babies on the forums!

 

 

 

1) Speak to the developers - no reason why they used a paper design, they could have tweaked built ships enough to work at T9/10. The RN built ships, not just dreamt them.

2) With respect, that is utter b@llocks. We just want ships that can work and be competitive not needing the red team to ignore them to work, not that they do currently, the RN ships have a huge big red 'shoot me for loads of damage' sign above them. You want a ship that only works by hiding in smoke, fine, but a whole line of them, sheesh.

3) RN - first ships with turbines, first ships with radar, first ships with sonar/ASDIC, first ships with mechanical FC, first ships with angled flight decks, first ships with steam catapults, first navy with seaplane carriers, first navy with a CV, first navy with submarines, first ships with depth charges. Dreadnought. Do I need to go on? The crew quality adds to this. The problem with the designs is that most of the 'stuff' you seem to know/think about were designed during the Naval Treaty period (Washington/London), and the UK (USA) adhered to them, the others lied and ignored the treaties, call it naive if you wish.

 

I have no problem with the lack of HE, just the lack of competitiveness, glass cannons that only work when they are invisible are not viable as they are too specialised. T2-5 are the issue, T6 is a PIA,7+ seems to work apparently, sort of, providing they can hide or remain 'off scope' to the red team.

Edited by philjd
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AWF-]
Players
1,196 posts
6,602 battles

 

So how come people are playing them ok? I'm far from a professional player yet I enjoy them and seem to do ok with these ships...

 

Oh look the British navy beats the Soviet ships on the Following tiers....

 

RN CA 5 Emerald 613 49.11 928 25308
SN CA 5 Kirov 689 47.29 767 23124

 

RN CA 4 Danae 1579 50.18 680 21987
SN CA 4 Svietlana 805 49.29 604 19966

 

RN CA 2 Weymouth 801 41.56 403 13241
SN CA 2 Novik 120 41.01 414 11560

 

 

Thanks for proving my argument..... 

 

You did not listen to what I said. Why am I not surprised?

 

Compare the first week of British cruisers to the first week of Russian cruisers and you might get an idea where these cruisers will end up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
4,160 posts
16,961 battles

 

You did not listen to what I said. Why am I not surprised?

 

Compare the first week of British cruisers to the first week of Russian cruisers and you might get an idea where these cruisers will end up.

 

As soon as all of the potatoes whining about them being crap have given up playing them, their stats probably will be quite ok.

Those players, who are ready to take their time with them, to learn how to play them, will surely find them quite entertaining.

 

The others can go back to play BBs

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AWF-]
Players
1,196 posts
6,602 battles

 

As soon as all of the potatoes whining about them being crap have given up playing them, their stats probably will be quite ok.

Those players, who are ready to take their time with them, to learn how to play them, will surely find them quite entertaining.

 

The others can go back to play BBs

 

Too bad you see it that way. Those crusiers could have been a bridge into the game for lots of new players, but instead they are used as a status symbol for a few "good" players that wants to brag about them. Not a smart strategy, if you ask me.
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SAD-]
Beta Tester, Players
751 posts
8,192 battles

3) RN - first ships with turbines, first ships with radar, first ships with sonar/ASDIC, first ships with mechanical FC, first ships with angled flight decks, first ships with steam catapults, first navy with seaplane carriers, first navy with a CV, first navy with submarines, first ships with depth charges. Dreadnought. Do I need to go on? The crew quality adds to this. The problem with the designs is that most of the 'stuff' you seem to know/think about were designed during the Naval Treaty period (Washington/London), and the UK (USA) adhered to them, the others lied and ignored the treaties, call it naive if you wish.

 

This is a Naval Computer game... if you want reality.... *Insert Quote here* 

 

You fan boys really need to drop the past... stop living in the past.. no wonder the UK is so backward!

 

Answer to your First this, first that.

1) If it wasn't for Ferdinard Verbiest designing the first car to be propelled by steam jack then the RN would not have designed the ships.. Thank the Belgium's.

2) Look at the Germans for the design of Radar, a man going by the name the Heinrich Hertz... Without the Germans, you would have nothing to stick on your ships!

3) The first military submarine was RUSSIAN built by a carpenter called Yefim Nikonov for Peter the Great in 1720.... OUCH this must sting! :trollface:

4) First Angled flight deck was USS Birmingham on the 14th November 1910.

 

So will end this with... "Do I need to go on?"

Edited by Ivanovich_Rudakov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[B0TS]
Beta Tester
1,789 posts
6,430 battles

 

This is a Naval Computer game... if you want reality.... *Insert Quote here* 

 

You fan boys really need to drop the past... stop living in the past.. no wonder the UK is so backward!

 

Answer to your First this, first that.

1) If it wasn't for Ferdinard Verbiest designing the first car to be propelled by steam jack then the RN would not have designed the ships.. Thank the Belgium's.

2) Look at the Germans for the design of Radar, a man going by the name the Heinrich Hertz... Without the Germans, you would have nothing to stick on your ships!

3) The first military submarine was RUSSIAN built by a carpenter called Yefim Nikonov for Peter the Great in 1720.... OUCH this must sting! :trollface:

4) First Angled flight deck was USS Birmingham on the 14th November 1910.

 

So will end this with... "Do I need to go on?"

 

If you really want to get silly

1) Steam engine - ancient greece. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero_of_Alexandria. But you need a practical engine, ie works consistently and sustainably. From having invented them, the UK started the Industrial revolution. The modern steam turbine was invented by Parsons.

2) Electricity - without electricity you don't get Hertz, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Gilbert_(astronomer) [or, again, you could go back to ancient greece for a less practical 'discovery]. EDIT - sometimes a memory refresh is worthwhile - Hertz, if no one makes use and it falls away, then, pointless. In strict terms, you are correct, but not in real terms as it had to be 'reinvented' by everyone in the 30's [general comment - does no one read technical manuals...?]

3) Yefim Nikoniv - fascinating, thank you, I hadn't heard of it or him. now if you could only work towards sharing such stuff without feeling the need to ram it down peoples throats....

4) Angled flight deck - not ramp. You ought to appreciate the difference as the current (and only) Russian CV has both.

 

Living in the past - you do realise that the ships in the game are from the era 1900 through to 1950ish, which is the past and the era about which we are discussing? For modern stuff, WW2+, the US is the best place to look as they are leading development in this sphere - this is not knocking the Russian Navy, just reality. If the Tsarist plan for Naval expansion had not been cancelled by WW1/Revolution, the Russian Navy would have been a force to reckon with in this games era. Again, not the Russian Navy's fault, or the Russian peoples, just historical reality.

 

Look, one of the benefits of discussing things in these forums over the years is finding out things, the RN is not what is was, but that does not been that it never 'was', please learn to appreciate the difference.

 

 

Edited by philjd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×