Jump to content

S0und_Theif

Member
  • Content Сount

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    2939

About S0und_Theif

  • Rank
    Lieutenant (junior grade)
  • Insignia
  1. Hi Waregameing Dev Team, Would like to suggest to add Estonian Destroyer Vambola at T3. And Lennuk at T4, Vambola is Kapitan Miklucha Maklai (Orfey Class Destroyer - Russia) Lennuk is Avtroil (Izyaslav Class Destroyer - Russia) Both ships are from Russia, both ships were captured by the British in 1918, given to the Estonian Navy. Like Polish Destroyer Blyskawica, they may be premeiums and may or may not have unique playstyle. And fly the Estonian flag. Note: Both ships were sild to Peru in 1933: Vambola as Almirante Villar Lennuk as Almirante Guise These 2 may be possible to create a Pan-America Destroyer line. Although my research is still incomplete, but it is possible to create a Pan-American Destroyer line. Just need a Playstyle/Gimmik
  2. Hi Waregameing Dev Team, Would like to suggest to add Romanian Destroyers Marasti and/or Marasesti at T6. And Regele Ferdinand and/or Regina Maria at T7 Like Polish Destroyer Blyskawica, they may be premeiums and may or may not have unique playstyle. And fly the Romanian flag.
  3. S0und_Theif

    Sweden Cruiser Tre Kronor Class

    Hi Waregameing Dev Team, Would like to suggest to add Swedish Cruiser Tre Kronor and/or Gota Lejon. Possibly at T6 or T7. Like Polish Destroyer Blyskawica, they may be premeiums and may or may not have unique playstyle. And fly the Swedish flag. Side Note: Gota Lejon was sold to Chile as Almirante Latorre, possible for future Pan-American cruiser premium.
  4. Hi Wargameing Dev team, While playing the UK destroyer line it got me thinking, the Commonwealth of Nations fought along side with the British during WW2 in both Atlantic and Pacific theater. And after looking around the internet, I found that it is possible to create a Commonwealth of Nations destroyer line like the Pan-Asia destroyer line. Commonwealth of Nations playstyle/gimmik is the "Creeping Smoke Generator" and the "Individual Torpedo Launch" (Haida and Perth), where as Pan-Asia is "Deep Water Torpedo". The playstyle almost mirrors British DD, smoke, harrass, torp, flee. Almost. But if wargameing has other ideas to make the playstyle unique, I welcome it. Here is what I have come up with when looking around the internet: CA/CL T1 Swan (AU) -> (Grimsby Class) Note: Its T1 DD Line T2 Champlain (CA) -> HMS Torbay (S Class, T Class) Close to HMS Medea T3 Vancouver (CA) -> HMS Vimy (V Class, W Class) Mirrors HMS Valkyrie T4 Waterhen (AU) -> HMS Waterhen (V Class, W Class) Mirrors HMS Wakeful T5 Saguenay (CA) -> (A Class, B Class) Mirrors HMS Acasta T6 Ottowa (CA) -> HMS Griffin (G Class, H Class) Mirrors HMS Galant T7 Iroquoise (CA) or Ananta (AU) -> ("Tribal" Class) Mirrors HMCA Haida Note: Armed with 6 120mm guns insted of 8 of the Cossack T8 Napier (AU) -> (L Class, K Class, N Class) Mirrirs HMS Lightning T9 Anzac (AU) -> ("Battle" Class) Mirrors HMS Jutland T10 Voyager (AU) -> (Daring Class) Mirrors HMS Daring Note: HMAS Vampire already used in T3 and Voyager sounds nice compared to Vampire and Vendetta (Personal Opinion). Like the Voyager satellite. Maybe they can do a unique Camo after space battles. 🙂 And lets not forget our Kiwi friends, but will be premium cruiser ships T6 Leander (NZ) -> HMS Leander (Leander Class) Mirrors HMS Leander T7 Gambia (NZ) -> HMS Gambia (Fiji Class) Mirrors HMS Fiji Foot Note: CA = Canada AU = Australia NZ = New Zealand I hope that you like this suggestion and let me know if I have missed other DD that might mirror them in their respective tiers.
  5. Hi Wargameing Dev Team, I have look in the video about flooding and how much it is one dimensional. Current flooding mechanics is 90 seconds and 1 flooding with 20% reduction in speed. Although the devs are currently looking at solutions like making the flooding multiple and possibly shorter time flooding until it self repairs? I would like to suggest a new repair consumable for this, lets call it "Seal Compartment (lets say "F" Button. Below "R" button for easy reach)". Warships who got hit by torpedo, will suffer instant flooding, (except ships with torpedo protection), and you just used your repair consumable for 3 fires and its on cooldown. Pros Ship will stop flooding damage Cons Ship is flooded. 20% speed reduction. Seal Compartment will stop the flooding, BUT, the compartment is now flooded. You will not receive flooding damage, but you will suffer the 20% power reduction as you are flooded until repair module comes up after cool down or repairs itself. Once you have used the "Seal Compartment" consumable, should the flooded compartment continue the "countdown time till self-repair" after being torpedoed or after using the consumable? This may need to be debated. NOTE: As watching the episode, the Devs, has not yet mention if the flooding time will be change at 90 seconds. Maybe they might change it like how fire works? For DD 30 secs, CA/CA 60 secs, and BB 90 secs, or maybe not. Additional for Captain skill (Devs may or may not implement) Since flooding may become multiple like fire, should modify a Lv.4 Captain skill. "Fire Prevention" now becomes "Fire and Flooding Prevention" Same concept, with this skill, 4 fires becomes 3 and -10% on catching fire. Likewise, 4 floods becomes 3 and -10% on flooding (if that's going to help increase the ship survivability, especially BB) Basic of Survivability, Damage Control System Mod 2 stack also apply to lessen the time of both fire and flooding. All this are merely suggestions. If the Devs like it, Im happy. If not, I would like to see what they plan to implement. :) And always, God Luck, Have Fun. :)
  6. S0und_Theif

    Finland? (Finnish Navy)

    Väinämöinen class Coast defence ship? Probably a Tier 2 premium like the IJN Mikasa. Though only a few will play Tier 2 to 4 games and have no possibility to play combat missions and campaigns. :( Once you implement 1, others will be requested. Pan Europe, Pan Asian, and Pan American.
  7. S0und_Theif

    Alternate IJN Battleship line

    Sorry off topic @TD1 you can check US Tech tree suggestion thread. I have split 2 CV lines, 2 BB lines, 4 to 5 CA lines, and 2 DD lines. Have a look :) Much appreciate it. And you are right about RN, KM, and French BB. In my head, I can split the RN into 3 lines, and 2 lines for KM and French Navy (although incomplete and will stop at tier 8 laike Akizuki). 1 Line for RM. 1 line for Soviet Navy (but have problems on tier 7 as there are none, unless project 21or project 24 can fill the role)
  8. S0und_Theif

    Alternate IJN Battleship line

    Hi TD1, Desing A from deviant art by TZoli or the written in Japanese paper I attached? Cuz its the same 3 forward turret design, but nelson configuration (3 forward facing). Advantage is turret traverse. Turret C (Turret 3) no need to traverse 360 to aim. Disadvantage is still can't fire that gun when facing forward. Have to angle to fire. Looking from what I got, A-140 preliminary design sheet, configuration A, G, G1'A, G2'A, K, and J0 are current Izumo design. (Nelson type connfigutation or current Izumo type configuration). A, G, G1'A, G2'A, and J0 has 9 Guns, while K has 8 Guns. While design F2, F4, and F5 has 3 turrets (2 Forward, 1 Aft) 9 Guns. And Design F has 3 turrets (2 Forward, 1 Aft) 8 Guns And design B has 4 turrets (2 forward, 2 aft) 8 Guns. Design I has 4 turrets (2 forward, 1 aft) 10 Guns (Either Nevada configuration or Pensacola/Dallas Configuration). Design J2 has 4 turrets (2 forward, 2 aft) 12 Guns. All guns were armed with "40 c/m" can safely say that that is the intended main armament. 40 cm or 400 mm = 15.7 inch. But we can all agree that she must be armed with 40.6 cm or 406 mm = 16 inch to match North Carolina, Iowa, and Montana in gun fights Secondary armament consist of 15.5 cm or 155 mm = 6.1 inch. Configuration A, B, G, and F are armed with 4 turrets, 3 guns each. Configuration K and J0 are armed with 3 turrets, 3 guns each. And finally configuration I is armed with 2 turrets, 3 guns each. Teritary armament consist of 12.7 cm or 127 mm = 5 inch dual purpose guns. All configuration has 6 turrets, 2 guns. Except configuration I wich has 8 turrets, 2 guns. The last armament is AA guns 25 mm = 1 inch guns in triple mount. Looks like they only mounted 12 of them. (This is preliminary design after all and paid no attention to AA guns after 1943 upgrade) My take is Design F2 as standard Tier 9 ship. Design B, I, and G (current Izumo) as premium Tier 9. And Design J2 as Tier 10 premium. What do you think TD1, mr_glitchy_R and DeadArashi? :) Also, Pardon if this is a focused topic on Izumo (A-140) and not as an entire Alternate IJN Ship tree. :( For visual comparison: Tzoli A = Design G1'A, G2'A, J0 Tzoli B = Design F2 Tzoli C = Design B Tzoli D = Design G Tzoli E = Design F Tzoli F = Design I Tzoli G = Design K Tzoli H = Design J2
  9. S0und_Theif

    Alternate IJN Battleship line

    Just a wishful thinking that Isizuchi would make a better T4 vs Myogi. Probably same class but different name. You can probably get away with that right? :)
  10. S0und_Theif

    Alternate IJN Battleship line

    Golly you beat me to it (Ship Suggestion) :) But you ship line is more diverse compared to mine. Though my suggestion to JP BB Line ii: Kawachi -> Ishizuchi -> Kongou -> Ise -> Nagato -> Tosa -> Izumo -> Yamato Tier 4 Ishizuchi fits in better vs Myogi 1. Ishizuchi has 10 x 12 inch guns vs Myogi 6 x 14 inch guns Im ok loosing the 20 km range and horrid dispersion for 10 shells (even with horrid dispersion there is enough shells that at least 1 or 2 of them will hit the target) 2. Loosing premium status will mean gains in hulls, range finder, and propulsion upgrades. At least for tier 4 standards. Compared to other Tier 4's, other navy's has a much better broadside: Wyoming / Arkansas = 12 x 12 inch Nassau = 10 x 11 inch (aimed right) Orion = 10 x 13.5 inch Courbet = 10 x 12 inch (broadside) Dante Alighieri = 12 x 12 inch (possible Italian T4) Nikolai I = 12 x 12 inch (possible Russian T4) Tier 6 in my opinion, Ise is much more suitable. Same 12 x 14 inch guns, but with better configuration (Optional): Tier 9 = Izumo Do you think they should change the Izumo from A-140G to a more conventional configuration A-140F (2 forward, 1 aft)and armed with the same 9 x 16 inch guns? Having those rear guns (Y turret) saved me in multiple engagements. Forward facing guns will only go to Nelson, G3, Dunkirque, and Richelieu. No need to torture players in Tier 9 for Japanese BB. Tier 10 = A-150 Do you think the A-150 should occupy Yamato's guns or a separate class? A-150 will carry 6 x 20 inch guns on a Yamato Hull. (Assuming the range and the dispersion is not so horrid like the myogi) In the US tech tree suggestion, Nebraska, a 8 x 18 inch / 47 cal armed Montana. A separate class. Or like the British Conqueror, which is armament switchable. For CA,s I like your diversity, but i would like to see Myoko, and Takao class have armament option like Mogami Class. Japanese engineered the Mogami to put 6.1 inch guns in triple mount (secondaries of the Yamato) to classify it as a light cruiser but upgradeable to 8 inch in dual mount to be a heavy cruiser. Light cruiser and Heavy cruiser designation was by gun caliber in WW2 but no restriction in armor detail. You can have a faster firing 15 x 6.1 inch guns sacrificing damge or 10 x 8 inch guns sacrificing rate of fire. (Japan ships have horrid turret traverse, as seen on all JP ships. This will be its disadvantage to make the game fair) And lastly, to get B-65 Large cruiser and Shinano Aircraft Carrier, Shinano will require Hakuryu and Yamato to unlock. And B-65 will require Yamato and Zao to unlock. Both are at Tier 9. (like the US tech tree suggestion) Alaska, B-65, Strasbourg, Scharnhorst, Andrea Doria, Kronstadt, and (UK Large Cruiser Concept) will all be at Tier 9 and requires 1 BB and 1 CA/CL to unlock. A powerful ship requires some grinding effort to unleash its power. Shinano is a BB converted to CV, it is most fitting to require Yamato and Hakuryu to unlock. (US has suggested to convert an Iowa and Alaska hull to a Carrier). This will rival Shinano in US tech tree. But these are my opinion only. :) I do hope everyone is ok with this concept. :) :) Cheers
  11. S0und_Theif

    US Tech Tree Suggestions

    I am very happy and pleased at wargaming for adding the light cruisers for the US tech tree line, but more can still be done. Especially if the community is eyeing the Alaska class large cruiser. Here is an updated suggestion / wishlist for the US Tech tree. I'm gonna follow-up the info tomorrow. I have shaves some ships and added new ships in the line. Sorry bout the bad handwriting, one of my nerves got misplaces and i cant write well for a while. Some few info: Yes, Alaska will require Iowa and Oregon City to unlock. Likewise for Mill Springs carrier will require Yorktown and Maine to unlock. I was thinking using Gearing to unlock Oakland and Somers. For Somers it will be worth it. But gor Oakland, im having 2nd thoughts as it will be of a too much hassle for the player to reach Tier 10 DD to unlock Tier 7 CLAA. Please share your thoughts on that. Chattanooga, Detroit, V. Islands, Maine, Mill Springs and Manila are just suggestive names for the ships. Wargaming may change them if they are to be released. Constitution is CC5 to stay true with the Lexington class Battlecruiser.
  12. S0und_Theif

    US Tech Tree Suggestions

    I saw that video too from Flamu and Noster, if buffalo would be added as tier 9 CA, it can branch with either Baltimore or Oregon City depending on the Tier 9 split in the suggestion. It will be like Juneau (1945), which will be researched via one of the modules in tier 9. Buffalo dose not have the auto loader like Des Moines, so its manual labor and will have low rate of fire vs Des Moines and Worcester. Tier 9 will be ok. Unless Wargameing nurfed its AA vs Baltimore or Oregon City to be more of a brawler cruiser than a AA cruiser. Cleaveland and Baltimore were made with the same concept hull, much like Brooklyn and Witchita, as well as Fargo and Oregon City. American CLs have more guns but carries 6 inch / 152mm guns, where as CAs carries 8 inch / 203 mm guns but less 1 turret or 3 guns (exception with buffalo). Damage wise they are almost the same with CL slightly faster at reload. Buffalo and Alaska will be the ultimate tier 9 Cruiser killers or Battleship busters for a cruiser. If thats the case, Gneisenau (11 inch / 283 mm), 1940 Heavy Cruiser Design (UK), Dunkerque, Andrea Doiria, B65 (Ishikari in WOWS forum) and Kronshtadt (12 inch / 305 mm) will branch at Tier 9 to go against the Alaska class. This cruiser killers was suggested to be unlocked once the player has researched both Tier 9 and Tier 10 cruiser modules. (like in some tanks in WOT). There are some ships out there where it was fully conceptuallized or made by wargameing themselves that I still do not know about. So would like to ask the communities help to complete them in my future tech tree suggestions. I have been thinking of 2 branch split in German BB line and 3 branch split on UK BB line. They will stop at tier 9 but meet up in tier 10. This dose not mean you need to unlock all branches to unlock tier 10 BB. (Work in progress concept and will be discussed on a separate topic. This is only a teaser.)
  13. S0und_Theif

    US Tech Tree Suggestions

    Hi, I have revised the tech tree as per inputs and added new ones to maximize the USN fleet. (revision 3) Basically, there are now 2 versions in the cruiser line. I cannot decide which one is better but i'm sure the split will begin with New Orleans. Missile cruisers are no more. But still put Kentucky and Hawaii there to be Tier 10 premium. What modifications will be needed will make the ships effective, ill let you decide. No missile. Added branch in tier 9 carriers, Mill Springs (BB-66 USS Kentucky) and Manila (CB-4 USS Philippines), this will also serve as room for Shinano, a BB turned CV in Japanese tech tree in my future suggestion for Japan tech tree. Since US carriers are named after great battles or great men who contributed in the revolutionary war, it is fitting for Mill Springs (Battle of Mill Springs in Kentucky 1862) and Manila (Battle of Manila in Philippines 1898). Added tier 10 Worcester and Gearing but armed with 5"/54 caliber Mark 16 gun (the same secondaries armed in Montana Class battleship. Nebraska is a basically Montana class armed with 18"/45 guns. Guns are smaller than the Yamato's 18.1"/45 guns and 1 gun less than the Yamato. Please let me know what you think about this updated tech tree and if the dev team will approve this line up. And if the dev team approves, I will continue my research for the rest of the nation ship line up. Thanks for your feedback.
  14. S0und_Theif

    US Tech Tree Suggestions

    i can see your picture. sure I'll revise the list. Lemme know if you have other opinions with the rest of the line. Thank you for your inputs. It helps to balance the tech tree.
  15. S0und_Theif

    US Tech Tree Suggestions

    Pensacola class/ Northampton class should be deleted at tier 5 and start the branch at tier 6 with the New Orleanse class, correct? And the 5 missile ships can be deleted. Though it is only a suggestion, Im comfortable deleteing them. :)
×