The Gneisenhau. Deliberate error?

[Migantium_Mashum]

Looking on my FB page I noticed an article from WG about the second anniversary and In that article was a question from a member asking why the Gneisenhau (Tier7) does not have the 3 guns per turret as it did when in operational service.

My question:

Is this a deliberate oversight and if the answer is negative can a correction be made to the ship in game to make her historically accurate.

[snakecake]

it was deliberate due to gun caliber progression , WG wants calibers to either stay he same or go up so they gave Gneisenau its refit it never actually got.

 

If you want the 11" guns you can get that by buying the Scharnhorst or getting extremely lucky with a supercontainer.

[Vaderan]

The Gneisenau is in this game for quite a while by now. Do you honestly beleave, you were the first one to recognize this change on the Gneisenau?

No.

This has been discussed and brought to attention countless times, and a little bit of research would have been enough to figure it out...

[PseudoMi]

Originally it had 3x 283mm guns per turret, like Scharhnorst.

 

But there was a real plan, after taking bombing damage (courtesy RAF) to upgrade it to 2x 380mm per turret (same as Bismarck) while in docks. The plan never materialized but you have it in game. Basically you have 3/4 of Bismarck firepower and also very good uniform 128mm secondaries (also never materialized) which have 1/4 pen instead of almost useless 1/6 pen for Scharhnorst's 105s.

[Tyrendian89]

1 minute ago, Vaderan said:

The Gneisenau is in this game for quite a while by now. Do you honestly beleave, you were the first one to recognize this change on the Gneisenau?

No.

This has been discussed and brought to attention countless times, and a little bit of research would have been enough to figure it out...

 

this always gets me. How stupid do these people think the rest of the world is to make them the first to notice stuff like this...

[Migantium_Mashum]

I was not the first but boy I feel the love.

 

I DIDN'T SEE ANOTHER POST ABOUT IT AND NOR DID I CLAIM TO BE THE FIRST, I ASKED A QUESTION.

 

AND I CERTAINLY DO NOT PRESUME THAT EVERYONE ELSE IS STUPID... BUT YOU SIR APPEAR POMPOUS AND ILL MANNERED.

 

[DJ_Die]

17 minutes ago, Tyrendian89 said:

 

this always gets me. How stupid do these people think the rest of the world is to make them the first to notice stuff like this...

He's one of the i play for fun, not for statistics, crowd. Does that explain it? :)

3 minutes ago, Migantium_Mashum said:

I was not the first but boy I feel the love.

 

I DIDN'T SEE ANOTHER POST ABOUT IT AND NOR DID I CLAIM TO BE THE FIRST, I ASKED A QUESTION.

 

AND I CERTAINLY DO NOT PRESUME THAT EVERYONE ELSE IS STUPID... BUT YOU SIR APPEAR POMPOUS AND ILL MANNERED.

 

 

Well how about using the forum SEARCH function? YOU SIR WOULDN'T APPEAR DUMB AND STUPID. 

[RamirezKurita]

It's basically because some players rage at the game as they fixate on a single variable - the calibre of the main battery. This vocal subset of players cry out at any unusual design that doesn't follow the typical progression and claim anything with a low calibre gun is useless, regardless of the overall ship's performance. To appease this vocal minority, WG had to instead opt for starting the Gneisenau with her planned 380mm upgrade and strip the 283mm guns from her.

 

This does create the strange situation where the stock ship involves the class being named after the second ship, using the guns from a planned but never implemented refit combined with the engine from large cruiser design that was designed but never built. It's one of the most chimeric of all the current ship classes in the game

[anonym_MfZ6T7iwWpUC]

16 minutes ago, Migantium_Mashum said:

I was not the first but boy I feel the love.

 

I DIDN'T SEE ANOTHER POST ABOUT IT AND NOR DID I CLAIM TO BE THE FIRST, I ASKED A QUESTION.

 

AND I CERTAINLY DO NOT PRESUME THAT EVERYONE ELSE IS STUPID... BUT YOU SIR APPEAR POMPOUS AND ILL MANNERED.

 

 

And had you spent 30 minutes reading some history web sites, you would have your answer.

[Tungstonid]

52 minutes ago, Tyrendian89 said:

 

this always gets me. How stupid do these people think the rest of the world is to make them the first to notice stuff like this...

 

Well, considering what people see daily, not just in WoWS, the bar is set very low indeed.

Sometimes it feels like you are lucky that your team mates can at least press W.

[Chaos_Umbra]

5 hours ago, RamirezKurita said:

It's one of the most chimeric of all the current ship classes in the game

 

Sorry to say but that crown is taken by the Monarch... with 1930's aircraft facilities and 1950's masts cause WG made it up by mixing several ships. Unlike half of the Gneisenau refit, sure the secondaries and AA are made up but at least the guns for the refit were actually built but then diverted to the Atlantic wall as shore batteries instead.

[Unintentional_submarine]

Yes yes yes... he should have done some more work, and asking this question so long after the inclusion of the ship does imply at least a limited thoughtlessness (I mean seriously... a year?), but that doesn't mean we should just jump on him and point this out harshly when the OP is civil and asking an honest question. It would have been different had he come in and claimed some sort of special knowledge and been a d-bag. So let's not debase ourselves here.

[StringWitch]

On 18/09/2017 at 5:51 PM, snakecake said:

it was deliberate due to gun caliber progression , WG wants calibers to either stay he same or go up so they gave Gneisenau its refit it never actually got.

 

If you want the 11" guns you can get that by buying the Scharnhorst or getting extremely lucky with a supercontainer.

 

They stuck Kirov in the middle of the USSR cruisers, and KGV marks a dramatic calibre drop in the recent RN BB line, so the 'calibre progression' line of reasoning is clear BS. It was purely to sell Scharnhorsts.

[Chaos_Umbra]

2 hours ago, StringWitch said:

 

They stuck Kirov in the middle of the USSR cruisers, and KGV marks a dramatic calibre drop in the recent RN BB line, so the 'calibre progression' line of reasoning is clear BS. It was purely to sell Scharnhorsts.

Actually WG used the 'calibre progression' argument to nerf the KGV down to tier 7 by removing a few thousand tonnes of it's great armor scheme to make it squishy completely unlike the real thing... then they announce the Pan Asian DDs which goes from 139mm > 120mm from tier 6 to 7. So it clearly wasn't the reason... maybe they wanted to sell more T7 RN BB premiums, cause 2 was clearly not enough.

[mil71]

They wanted to make the two ugly sisters different.

Else it's basically just another Scharnhorst with different secondaries and a different aircraft hangar.

[WeGreedy]

Submarines when?

Spoiler

 

[The_Xas]

Wow, what a way to make someone welcome to the forum. Talking about toxic. Why not search his IP and ddos him, that'll teach him to ask stupid questions. You must be so proud. 

[mtm78]

28 minutes ago, The_Xas said:

Why not search his IP and ddos him, that'll teach him to ask stupid questions.

 

Wew, so toxic, how about you not accusing the OP of being stupid ok? 

 

On 18-9-2017 at 6:47 PM, Migantium_Mashum said:

Is this a deliberate oversight and if the answer is negative can a correction be made to the ship in game to make her historically accurate.

 

[valoaa]

On 18/09/2017 at 5:51 PM, snakecake said:

it was deliberate due to gun caliber progression , WG wants calibers to either stay he same or go up so they gave Gneisenau its refit it never actually got.

 

If you want the 11" guns you can get that by buying the Scharnhorst or getting extremely lucky with a supercontainer.

 

Not true anymore, King George the V at tier 7 has a lower caliber than Queen Elizabeth at tier 6.

[Chaos_Umbra]

7 hours ago, valoaa said:

 

Not true anymore, King George the V at tier 7 has a lower caliber than Queen Elizabeth at tier 6.

But it was the reason WG gave that the KGV was dropped from tier 8 to 7 though, and then invented the abomination that now sits at tier 8.

[MuddyMo]

Scharnhorst needed something to make her special instead of just being a gneisenau's A hull with a perma camo and a credit boost.

and WG doesn't want to have a ship that plays completely different than the ship before and after in a line.

[mtm78]

1 minute ago, wesley10x said:

and WG doesn't want to have a ship that plays completely different than the ship before and after in a line.

 

You mean you play a Yorck like you play the ship before it and after it? 

 

 

It might be a good PR line, but there are way to many examples where this already isn't true. 

[MuddyMo]

1 minute ago, mtm78 said:

 

You mean you play a Yorck like you play the ship before it and after it? 

 

 

It might be a good PR line, but there are way to many examples where this already isn't true. 

I mean WG tries to avoid it but with a ship like the porck they had no choice really

 

And i haven't played a yorck

[mtm78]

Moskva plays like a Donskoi? Roon like Hindenburg? Donskoi is a floating citadel, Moskva is the current best Russian BB in the game ( barely though, Imperator comes pretty close  ). If I see a Roon I avoid pushing into it and it's barely a threat, a Hindenburg is the epitome of a jack of all trades which will hurt you no matter what you do. 

 

Even them trying to avoid it seems mostly dependent on what economic incentives can be met by doing so   

 

Not that I mind that much, I mean I can live with some fluctuations even when I do admit I perform better if the transitions are smooth. 

 

 

 

[mtm78]

edit: Nginx burp again sorry