Jump to content
Drakken_Xero

Greetings! I am Drakken_Xero, and I am contributing the Soviet VMF tech tree (Hello from the other side)

37 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
16 posts
1,802 battles

Greetings, fellow Asian players. I am Drakken_Xero, and I'm speculating for the Soviet VMF tech tree. Also known as Xero_Snake from the other side. Don't be alarmed, I came with no intention to harm anyone else.

 

My signature below is how far I proposed and what am I planning soon in the future.

 

Take a look around, and ask me any questions in a civil way.

Edited by Drakken_Xero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,296 posts
9,726 battles

interesting proposals, but about the battlecruiser line: they're basically just cruisers with more armour and better armaments? will their concealments be the equivalent of a BB or a CA? will there be any fighter seaplane available for this line?  since the current soviet line are not equipped with fighter scouts due to radar equipment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,397 posts
13,360 battles

Greetings, fellow Asian players. I am Drakken_Xero, and I'm freelance contributing for the Soviet VMF tech tree. Also known as Xero_Snake from the other side. Don't be alarmed, I came with no intention to harm anyone else.

 

My signature below is how far I'm voluntary contributing and what am I planning soon in the future.

 

Take a look around, and ask me any questions in a civil way.

 

So I suffered from VMF Tier 2 to Tier 9, ITS ALL BECAUSE OF YOU:izmena::red_button:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
16 posts
1,802 battles

interesting proposals, but about the battlecruiser line: they're basically just cruisers with more armour and better armaments? will their concealments be the equivalent of a BB or a CA? will there be any fighter seaplane available for this line?  since the current soviet line are not equipped with fighter scouts due to radar equipment.

 

Their battlecruisers were at first developed like a large heavy cruiser (or a large armored cruiser, if you will) with small battleship guns. From Tier VI to VIII, their development began to integrate Type B light battleship concept. Until Kronshtadt, it became a product of heavy cruiser and light battleship combined. It seem like a sound evolution in technological development along the line.

 

Sadly, the Soviets did not make a seaplane with powerful enough armaments to become fighters.

 

So basically you're behind all the horrible Russian Cruisers rudder shift time :amazed:?

 

Not quite, but it seem logical in fluid dynamics perspective as a long slender hull tend to cruise faster than short wide hull at the cost of rudder shift.

 

Welcome did they get sick of you blowing your own trumped on RU forums?

 

Actually from NA forums. I'm here as a mean for a little more publicity.

 

 

So I suffered from VMF Tier 2 to Tier 9, ITS ALL BECAUSE OF YOU:izmena::red_button:

 

LOL!

 

One mustn't expect too much for the power of Stalinium.

 

But not all of them were what I expected, as some of their ships got into the game were overlooked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
16 posts
1,802 battles

Interesting research, but you might want to take out that "freelance contributing" bit if you aren't working for WG.

 

Done edited :)

 

I hope you guys are alright to get along with me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
16 posts
1,802 battles

 

NEIN !! Russian shall rule the seas FOR MOTHER LAND AND VODKA :izmena:!!! 

 

LOL! To achieve that, first, a fleet must work together and cruise to victory! :izmena:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
1,637 posts
7,230 battles

Greetings Drakken_Xero, I am AntifoulAwl. . I freelance contribute to my appalling winrate. Don't be alarmed, my only intention is to contribute slightly absurd remarks on this forum, although every now there is a bit of gold. I like to post old photos to punctuate my point.

 

My siggy below is sploosh~~~torpedo away!!

 

I would be interested to know, in what way are you 'contributing' to the tech tree?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
16 posts
1,802 battles

Greetings Drakken_Xero, I am AntifoulAwl. . I freelance contribute to my appalling winrate. Don't be alarmed, my only intention is to contribute slightly absurd remarks on this forum, although every now there is a bit of gold. I like to post old photos to punctuate my point.

 

My siggy below is sploosh~~~torpedo away!!

 

I would be interested to know, in what way are you 'contributing' to the tech tree?

 

 

 

What do you mean?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,296 posts
9,726 battles

 

Their battlecruisers were at first developed like a large heavy cruiser (or a large armored cruiser, if you will) with small battleship guns. From Tier VI to VIII, their development began to integrate Type B light battleship concept. Until Kronshtadt, it became a product of heavy cruiser and light battleship combined. It seem like a sound evolution in technological development along the line.

 

Sadly, the Soviets did not make a seaplane with powerful enough armaments to become fighters.

 

If historically they dont have it, wouldn't it be better if WG propose it for balancing reasons? Cause in the KM CA line, a FW 190 was mounted on a Roon, which i dont think at that time the germans actually modified it to become a seaplane version. So why not just make a yak/mig with floats as the substitute fighter? since this game is not a simulator anyway. Because i feel that if the light cruiser variant (currently) do not have fighter scouts but make it up with its radar, then the battlecruiser line should be obliged with some sort of balancing implementation as well (or maybe they could reduce the rudder shift this time :D or add a permanent AA Defensive fire as its 2nd consumable rather than radar so we can ditch the fighter aircraft modification) Thank you so much for replying my enquiry, looking forward to more of your suggestions in the future :honoring:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,163 posts
1,874 battles

 

What do you mean?

 

 

I guess what Awl (and for that matter, me too) are asking is that when you say "contributing", it feels rather ambiguous as to whether you're speculating on the future tech tree, or are actually involved in the development process. The former is fine - we don't mind speculation posts to discuss upcoming tech trees. However, it'd be good to remove that ambiguity by stating clearly that the information is speculative.

 

The reason we're asking is that because in your original, unedited post, there was some implication that you are working in an official capacity. If you are, that sounds like a legal issue with a NDA violation. If you're not, that's a ToS issue with impersonation of game staff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
16 posts
1,802 battles

 

If historically they dont have it, wouldn't it be better if WG propose it for balancing reasons? Cause in the KM CA line, a FW 190 was mounted on a Roon, which i dont think at that time the germans actually modified it to become a seaplane version. So why not just make a yak/mig with floats as the substitute fighter? since this game is not a simulator anyway. Because i feel that if the light cruiser variant (currently) do not have fighter scouts but make it up with its radar, then the battlecruiser line should be obliged with some sort of balancing implementation as well (or maybe they could reduce the rudder shift this time :D or add a permanent AA Defensive fire as its 2nd consumable rather than radar so we can ditch the fighter aircraft modification) Thank you so much for replying my enquiry, looking forward to more of your suggestions in the future :honoring:

 

The Soviet design bureaus were very particular with their respective specialty. For seaplanes, OKB Beriev and other few like Shavrov and Nikitin were their specialized field. OKB Mikoyan, Sukhoi and Yakovlev were not responsible for it, however. So don't expect a modified Yak or MiG planes to be floatplanes.

 

As for Soviet planes, as far as the CV line discussion went, this is the most difficult task for dev team to make it happen. It requires sheer load of dedication and efforts to come out with a very good warplanes line for their aircraft carriers, and I believe player base can give helping hands for them to create a framework through a thorough researches and analysis. Same can be said for both German and Italian ones as well, and maybe French to a lesser extend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
16 posts
1,802 battles

 

I guess what Awl (and for that matter, me too) are asking is that when you say "contributing", it feels rather ambiguous as to whether you're speculating on the future tech tree, or are actually involved in the development process. The former is fine - we don't mind speculation posts to discuss upcoming tech trees. However, it'd be good to remove that ambiguity by stating clearly that the information is speculative.

 

The reason we're asking is that because in your original, unedited post, there was some implication that you are working in an official capacity. If you are, that sounds like a legal issue with a NDA violation. If you're not, that's a ToS issue with impersonation of game staff.

 

I see. I replaced them but having trouble to edit the title. I apologize for the unknowing misunderstanding.

 

PS: Sorry for double-posting. Connection problem.

Edited by Drakken_Xero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
16 posts
1,802 battles

Hello there fellow Malaysian!

 

Hi there. Nice to meet you. See you in the gathering on the evening if I can :)

 

 

Edited by Drakken_Xero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×