Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
darkstar73

Argentinian T7 Cruiser on the horizon

32 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[FDUSH]
Players
1,044 posts
6,194 battles

I'm Argentinean and I will really LOVE to have a ship from my country. And ARA 9 de Julio it's ok... But... what I (and most argentineans) would really love it's to have the ARA General Belgrano on the game. And there is something that has been bugging me since I heard about USS Boise.

Apparently Wargamming thinks there will be political problems if they bring the Belgrano (Ex USS Phoenix) to the game for the whole Malvinas war issue. I don't think there would be any problems. Hell, I guess even the survivors of the ARA General Belgrano (C-4) would like to see the ship sailing virtually again.

What I'm worried about it's that WG would bring the ARA 9 de Julio to "avoid" those issues and would never bring the ARA General Belgrano into the game. And I already wonder if they will bring both ships knowing that there will be three ships which are almost identical?

Allright, we already have ships which are nearly identical. Like Omaha, Marblehead and Murmansk. Also Iowa/Missouri and North Carolina/Alabama.

 

If I would have the money I would buy both ARA ships. But if the choise it's between 9 de Julio and Belgrano, I would definetely would go for the Belgrano.

 

Hell, probably WG would have alot of publicity on Argentina (and even part of south america) for the introduction of the General Belgrano.

 

Still it's a huge "YAY!" for the ARA Nueve de Julio... but don´t forget the ARA General Belgrano please!
 

PD: IMG_20180329_000432.thumb.jpg.dc72cca04003b6097ce9388bec7bfacf.jpg

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
761 posts
6,661 battles

No to the Belgrano, please. Lovely looking ship but the Falklands War is still too recent to be comfortably placed in a game like this one. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
1,016 posts
15,380 battles
36 minutes ago, Sargento_YO said:

I'm Argentinean and I will really LOVE to have a ship from my country. And ARA 9 de Julio it's ok... But... what I (and most argentineans) would really love it's to have the ARA General Belgrano on the game. And there is something that has been bugging me since I heard about USS Boise.

Apparently Wargamming thinks there will be political problems if they bring the Belgrano (Ex USS Phoenix) to the game for the whole Malvinas war issue. I don't think there would be any problems. Hell, I guess even the survivors of the ARA General Belgrano (C-4) would like to see the ship sailing virtually again.

What I'm worried about it's that WG would bring the ARA 9 de Julio to "avoid" those issues and would never bring the ARA General Belgrano into the game. And I already wonder if they will bring both ships knowing that there will be three ships which are almost identical?

Allright, we already have ships which are nearly identical. Like Omaha, Marblehead and Murmansk. Also Iowa/Missouri and North Carolina/Alabama.

 

If I would have the money I would buy both ARA ships. But if the choise it's between 9 de Julio and Belgrano, I would definetely would go for the Belgrano.

 

Hell, probably WG would have alot of publicity on Argentina (and even part of south america) for the introduction of the General Belgrano.

 

Well I guess it is much better this way. Every thread on Reddit where Belgrano was mentioned ends with quite a number of posts deleted because of bad language and offends. Hell I would rather see it in the game as Boise but in the end it is WG call so we get NdJ.  I guess there is a lot of people there who have their preferences about some ship. But it is understandable that not all of them could be included in the game. How could they there were so many ships, hell Fletcher class alone had over 170 ships and you could probably find someone for every one of them who would want it in the game for some reason. But it is on WG to decide which will be included and which don't.

 

Also there are some differences between Boise and Phoenix, just like NdJ and Belgrano. So even if they rename it it won't be a same model and it will require some changes. I doubt that would happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DKMUK]
Players
255 posts
2,482 battles

yeah its a shame we had to sink the belgrano but hey thats war, i truly hope all that were killed rest in peace and my condolences to the family.

 

That said a Argentina tech tree just wouldn't work, The vast majority Argentina warships were either brought from other country's or built in other country's.

 

Take the ARA Veinticinco de Mayo, it was just a old British colossus class carrier that was first commissioned in 1945.

a lot of Argentina's ships that would fit into the time frame of world of warships are to be quite frank second hand obsolete decommissioned warships from other nations  

 

 

    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
503 posts
1,775 battles
14 minutes ago, Warhawk1984 said:

That said a Argentina tech tree just wouldn't work, The vast majority Argentina warships were either brought from other country's or built in other country's.

To be fair, that is the case for the Pan-Asian tree as well. They cater to the larger audiences that want a ship from their country in the game. These ships are more likely to be bought (to be fair, if we got HNoMS Stord in the game I'd buy her in an instant even though she's just a S-class RN DD.) so that's the ships that get developed.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FDUSH]
Players
1,044 posts
6,194 battles
17 minutes ago, Warhawk1984 said:

yeah its a shame we had to sink the belgrano but hey thats war, i truly hope all that were killed rest in peace and my condolences to the family.  

That was long time ago and alot of (sea) water passed under the bridge.

Hell, even I would find it funny, sailing in the Belgrano, in a division with a tier 8 ship and meet (And be sunk) by the Battleship Conqueror.

 

Nevertheless there are still arseholes that keep blamming every british person for that. Hell, even some was asholes enough to complain about the british help when the submarine ARA San Juan was lost some months ago. But then, there are still people in South America which keeps blaming current Spanish ones for what happened 400 years ago (the colonization).

 

Something I learned it's that doesn't matters what you do, what you say and even what you think, there will be allways people which will be ofended by that. (Reminds me of that chapter of South park when it was ordered that anything chrismas related which offends anyone must be removed, in the end everything related to Jesus, Santa claus, wreaths, trees, stars, lights, and candy canes are removed. Eventually everybody was displeased for that)

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BLOBS]
Beta Tester
5,052 posts
9,616 battles

Would be nice if we 1st get a real US crewtrainer for light cruisers that isnt a gimped omaha and no that isnt atlanta because she needs a even more specalized build to get the most out of her.

 

But well the 1st few real RN DDs were Panasia too.....just so telling when tehy do a new line and do a prem that isnt compatible with said line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Sailing Hamster
3,191 posts
3,153 battles
1 hour ago, Warhawk1984 said:

yeah its a shame we had to sink the belgrano but hey thats war, i truly hope all that were killed rest in peace and my condolences to the family.

 

That said a Argentina tech tree just wouldn't work, The vast majority Argentina warships were either brought from other country's or built in other country's.

 

Take the ARA Veinticinco de Mayo, it was just a old British colossus class carrier that was first commissioned in 1945.

a lot of Argentina's ships that would fit into the time frame of world of warships are to be quite frank second hand obsolete decommissioned warships from other nations  

 

 

    

 

I managed to work out a tree more or less for south america up to T8. I'll post it here if anyone is interested. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
[SCRUB]
Players
1,337 posts
12,571 battles
2 hours ago, RambaRal said:

Great, more T7 Radar behind a paywall... :fish_palm:

 

 

Fixed it for you. Since it seems like if you want radar at T7 you have to pull out the wallet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[H_FAN]
Players
1,862 posts
20,842 battles
6 hours ago, Warhawk1984 said:

yeah its a shame we had to sink the belgrano but hey thats war, i truly hope all that were killed rest in peace and my condolences to the family.

 

That said a Argentina tech tree just wouldn't work, The vast majority Argentina warships were either brought from other country's or built in other country's.

 

Take the ARA Veinticinco de Mayo, it was just a old British colossus class carrier that was first commissioned in 1945.

a lot of Argentina's ships that would fit into the time frame of world of warships are to be quite frank second hand obsolete decommissioned warships from other nations  

 

 

    

well a few earlier cruisers , 

Veinticinco de Mayo 6-190 mm f.e.  32 kts from 1931

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
4,214 posts
13,980 battles
8 hours ago, Sargento_YO said:

That was long time ago and alot of (sea) water passed under the bridge.

Hell, even I would find it funny, sailing in the Belgrano, in a division with a tier 8 ship and meet (And be sunk) by the Battleship Conqueror.

 

Nevertheless there are still arseholes that keep blamming every british person for that. Hell, even some was asholes enough to complain about the british help when the submarine ARA San Juan was lost some months ago. But then, there are still people in South America which keeps blaming current Spanish ones for what happened 400 years ago (the colonization).

 

Something I learned it's that doesn't matters what you do, what you say and even what you think, there will be allways people which will be ofended by that. (Reminds me of that chapter of South park when it was ordered that anything chrismas related which offends anyone must be removed, in the end everything related to Jesus, Santa claus, wreaths, trees, stars, lights, and candy canes are removed. Eventually everybody was displeased for that)

Though i agree with you sentiment old chap. But your own Government as late as 2012 (Cristina Fernández de Kirchner) has brought up the accusation that the Sinking of the Belgrano was a WarCrime even though your own Navy and the commander of the ship agrees they she was a legitimate target.  so it is still to soon

You are also bound to get some idiot in chat that will Gloat  and make toxic comments if he/she manages to sink the General Belgrano with torpedoes from a Royal Navy ship. 

 

So you want to turn the planned 9th  HMS Conqueror in to a submarine like the real 9th  HMS Conqueror.. Well i suppose there is some irony in that... The only issue there old chap is you will have to be in a Fail division to ever meet the Conqueror :Smile_hiding:

 

Happy sailing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GOUF]
Beta Tester
237 posts
5,210 battles
7 hours ago, MortenTardo said:

Fixed it for you. Since it seems like if you want radar at T7 you have to pull out the wallet. 

Good point  :Smile_coin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[B0TS]
Beta Tester
1,556 posts
4,809 battles
8 hours ago, Sargento_YO said:

Something I learned it's that doesn't matters what you do, what you say and even what you think, there will be allways people which will be ofended by that. 

Very true that.

 

OT - either Argentinian cruiser would be good to have in the game, but I understand why the Belgrano has not been chosen (My first duty as 'best man' at a wedding was for a Fleet Air Arm engineer who served during the Falklands campaign), personally I have no gripes over the matter, but dogs will fight over any bone given the opporftnity.

I doubt that any national South American navy can support a full tree without a huge amount of paper dreams, but a 'Pan-South American' tree, indeed yes, and they are not all second hand ships, but purpose built/designed for those navies.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
1,016 posts
15,380 battles
11 minutes ago, philjd said:

I doubt that any national South American navy can support a full tree without a huge amount of paper dreams, but a 'Pan-South American' tree, indeed yes, and they are not all second hand ships, but purpose built/designed for those navies.

 

None of them can and one united tree line is the best choice. Or we can end with something like this:

 

Argentine:

T9 DD - Fletcher

T10 DD - Allen M. Sumner/Gearing

 

Brazil:

T9 DD - Fletcher

T10 DD - Allen M. Sumner/Gearing

 

Chile:

T9 DD - Fletcher

T10 DD - Allen M. Sumner

 

Columbia:

T9 DD - Fletcher

T10 DD - Allen M. Sumner

 

If we put there a Mexico guess what would be their T9 and T10 DD? Yup Fletcher and Allen M. Sumner/Gearing again. And imagine if everyone of them would have their own gimmick. Even with one united line there will be quite a number of paper ship designs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BGNAV]
Players
741 posts
13,827 battles
8 hours ago, Spellfire40 said:

Would be nice if we 1st get a real US crewtrainer for light cruisers that isnt a gimped omaha and no that isnt atlanta because she needs a even more specalized build to get the most out of her.

 

But well the 1st few real RN DDs were Panasia too.....just so telling when tehy do a new line and do a prem that isnt compatible with said line.

if atlanta is not perfect for that ..........................

IFHE AFT CE BFT/SI

or what you want "perfect" trainer with 203mm guns so that IFHE is wasted

and sorry but for near 9k battles you should have few spare 19p captains or few mils.capXP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Sailing Hamster
3,191 posts
3,153 battles

Okay, here's what I've come up with, feel free to tear it to shreds

 

Shipname (operating country) (country of origin) (rough description)

 

  1. (?) ARA Murature (AG) (AG) (3x 105mm/45 Bofors)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_Murature_(P-20)
  2. ARA Nueve de Julio (AG) (GB) (4x6" protected cruiser, in light of recent discovery name doubtful)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_Nueve_de_Julio_(1892)
  3. ?
  4. Bahia class (BR) (GB) (10x 120mm/50 Vickers)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_cruiser_Bahia
  5. ?
  6. ARA Venticinco de Mayo (AG) (IT) (3x2x 190mm/53; 6x2x 4"/45; 2x3x 21" TT)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veinticinco_de_Mayo-class_cruiser
  7. ARA La Argentina (AG) (GB) (3x3x 6"/50 Vickers Mk W; 4x1x 4"/50 Vickers Mk M; 2x3x 21" TT)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_La_Argentina_(C-3)
  8. Almirante Tamandare (BR) (US ex St Louis) (5x3x 6"/47 - would be interesting to see how the same ship can be balanced on two tiers)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_St._Louis_(CL-49)#Transfer_to_Brazil
  9. BAP Almirante Grau (PE) (NL ex De Zeven Provincien de Ruyter) (4x2x 6"/50 Bofors rapid fire - doubtful for many reasons)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAP_Almirante_Grau_(CLM-81)
  10. ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
4,214 posts
13,980 battles
9 minutes ago, fumtu said:

 

None of them can and one united tree line is the best choice. Or we can end with something like this:

 

Argentine:

T9 DD - Fletcher

T10 DD - Allen M. Sumner/Gearing

 

Brazil:

T9 DD - Fletcher

T10 DD - Allen M. Sumner/Gearing

 

Chile:

T9 DD - Fletcher

T10 DD - Allen M. Sumner

 

Columbia:

T9 DD - Fletcher

T10 DD - Allen M. Sumner

 

If we put there a Mexico guess what would be their T9 and T10 DD? Yup Fletcher and Allen M. Sumner/Gearing again. And imagine if everyone of them would have their own gimmick. Even with one united line there will be quite a number of paper ship designs.

not quite correct.

 

Brazil.. Marcilio Dias and Acre class DD could work at 9 and maybe even 10

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcílio_Dias-class_destroyer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acre-class_destroyer

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
1,016 posts
15,380 battles
3 minutes ago, T0byJug said:

not quite correct.

 

Brazil.. Marcilio Dias and Acre class DD could work at 9 and maybe even 10

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcílio_Dias-class_destroyer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acre-class_destroyer

 

 

 Acre class with 4 guns, 2x3 torps could be T7 at best but more likely T6. Marcilio Dias is based on Mahan and with 5 guns and 2x4 would better fit at T8. With some buffs maybe T9 but no way that it could be a T10. Unless there is a some paper design T10 should be one of Brazilian Allen M. Sumner/Gearing  destroyers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BLOBS]
Beta Tester
5,052 posts
9,616 battles
15 minutes ago, _VAMPA_ said:

if atlanta is not perfect for that ..........................

IFHE AFT CE BFT/SI

or what you want "perfect" trainer with 203mm guns so that IFHE is wasted

and sorry but for near 9k battles you should have few spare 19p captains or few mils.capXP

Atlanta has the problem that she needs AFT and she needs it early in the build. 3 T4 skill builds limits you greatly plus i dont have a free 19 point since i will need 2 for the CL line because my main captain will start in Seattle. Need a 2ed for Dalas and Helena. and 0 cap exp atm im a colector with over 200 ships and playing usally all lines and not to keen on playing around with by T10  especally with 2 BB lines around in the last 3 releases. 

 

Atlanta is crap as a cretrainer since she needs 14-16 points just to even remotely work. As a crewtrainer a brooklyn/clevland would work at just 10 points

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Sailing Hamster
3,191 posts
3,153 battles
3 minutes ago, fumtu said:

 Acre class with 4 guns, 2x3 torps could be T7 at best but more likely T6. Marcilio Dias is based on Mahan and with 5 guns and 2x4 would better fit at T8. With some buffs maybe T9 but no way that it could be a T10. Unless there is a some paper design T10 should be one of Brazilian Allen M. Sumner/Gearing  destroyers.

Marcilio Dias recieved ASM's in late refits, just saying

 

:Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BGNAV]
Players
741 posts
13,827 battles
13 minutes ago, Spellfire40 said:

Atlanta has the problem that she needs AFT and she needs it early in the build. 3 T4 skill builds limits you greatly plus i dont have a free 19 point since i will need 2 for the CL line because my main captain will start in Seattle. Need a 2ed for Dalas and Helena. and 0 cap exp atm im a colector with over 200 ships and playing usally all lines and not to keen on playing around with by T10  especally with 2 BB lines around in the last 3 releases. 

 

Atlanta is crap as a cretrainer since she needs 14-16 points just to even remotely work. As a crewtrainer a brooklyn/clevland would work at just 10 points

well, i collect TXs ( have them all by playing all the lines ) and Camos, not gonna waste $ for slots Ty. no matter that i don't collect "just boats", yet i have 90 boats in the port.

free tip: play your TXs more. That way you gain more freeCapXP than you can breed 14p (or 10p if ur cheeep) caps for ships that you own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
4,214 posts
13,980 battles
11 minutes ago, fumtu said:

 Acre class with 4 guns, 2x3 torps could be T7 at best but more likely T6. Marcilio Dias is based on Mahan and with 5 guns and 2x4 would better fit at T8. With some buffs maybe T9 but no way that it could be a T10. Unless there is a some paper design T10 should be one of Brazilian Allen M. Sumner/Gearing  destroyers.

2x3 tubes just make them faster reload than German DDs lets say 70 or 80 secs and they could be a major pain in the arse.

2x4 Torp Tubes on the Marcilio Dias same reload as German DDs

 

2x4 is the torp  loadout on German DDs and IJN at tier 9 and 10(in case of German) so why not on South american DD

5x1 guns is the same as Fletcher at T9 and Fletcher is probably the best DD in the game

 

how could you make these DDs work.. Small stealthy DDs with good guns. Note the guns on the Mahan and these DDs are the same guns as the Fletcher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×