Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Paladinum

Naval Legend: USS NoCar

7 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

108
[ANZAC]
Member
404 posts
12,921 battles
8 hours ago, Paladinum said:

USS Washington with 3x4 356 mm please.

 

 

Wot?

Both NC class ships never had 14" guns. Early during the design phase the guns were upped to 16 in response to fears the Japanese would ignore the Washington "Naval Treaty. And even in the design phase the plan was only for a battery of 9 guns. No quad turrets. 

This makes 0 sense. Even the T7 ship has 16"guns. Unless you want to create another HE spamming BB - dear god no. There is enough of that in game already.

Why would you you want an NC class ship with 14"guns?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,015 posts
5,666 battles

 

26 minutes ago, j0e90 said:

Wot?

Both NC class ships never had 14" guns. Early during the design phase the guns were upped to 16 in response to fears the Japanese would ignore the Washington "Naval Treaty. And even in the design phase the plan was only for a battery of 9 guns. No quad turrets. 

This makes 0 sense. Even the T7 ship has 16"guns. Unless you want to create another HE spamming BB - dear god no. There is enough of that in game already.

Why would you you want an NC class ship with 14"guns?

USS Washington didn't have 14" guns. True. But did Gneisenau IRL have 380 mm guns?

Also I've seen a drawing that shows NC hull with 3x4 356 in a FB group of some hardcore naval enthusiasts. One of them is good as digging up unknown real designs.

 

Who says that the ship I suggested is going to be T7? She will be another T8 US BB, which the US line kinda has a bunch already in this game.

Even with 3x3 356 at T7 (who wants that), that ship would be nice to be in the game - there is no premium T7 US BB yet. West Virginia could have been it, but WG decided to derp out.

If not Washington then WG still have so many other names to pick (Maine, Lousiana, Mississippi, etc.). It was just a suggestion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,015 posts
5,666 battles
2 hours ago, dejiko_nyo said:

Need less non-BB premiums. Game's flooded with BBs.

There fixed it for ya :Smile_trollface:

I dislike BBs, yes, but an NC with 14" guns is a sight to see. There was NC proposal with 4x2 14" guns. That can be a good T7.

Edited by Paladinum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
108
[ANZAC]
Member
404 posts
12,921 battles
On 4/12/2019 at 12:14 PM, Paladinum said:

 

USS Washington didn't have 14" guns. True. But did Gneisenau IRL have 380 mm guns?

Also I've seen a drawing that shows NC hull with 3x4 356 in a FB group of some hardcore naval enthusiasts. One of them is good as digging up unknown real designs.

 

Who says that the ship I suggested is going to be T7? She will be another T8 US BB, which the US line kinda has a bunch already in this game.

Even with 3x3 356 at T7 (who wants that), that ship would be nice to be in the game - there is no premium T7 US BB yet. West Virginia could have been it, but WG decided to derp out.

If not Washington then WG still have so many other names to pick (Maine, Lousiana, Mississippi, etc.). It was just a suggestion.

Sorry, when I said the T7 ship I assumed you would work out I meant the Colorado. Dropping a 14" gun into a line that started getting 16" at T7 makes no sense. And it would take away one of the big upsides of the US 16" ships, its sweet super heavy AP shells.

And you really want to be in a 14" armed T8 ship in a T8 game? It would end up as just another 25-28 second reload HE spamming BB. The game has enough borderline $$$premium ships as it is.

And to answer your question why the Gneisenau has the 380? Germany was trying to refit the Gensienau with 380's during its refit in 42 before they gave up on the ship. So there is some historical relevance there. I know historical accuracy and WOWS really should not be mentioned on the same page.  And also WG wanted  to make the Schanrhorst unique and help them sell more $$$boats.

And there are only 2 NC class ships - Maine, Lousiana and Mississippi  are old pre treaty BBs. So would we just start making up new ships. Well, I guess if we can have a fantasy Ru BB line, why not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,015 posts
5,666 battles
8 hours ago, j0e90 said:

And you really want to be in a 14" armed T8 ship in a T8 game? It would end up as just another 25-28 second reload HE spamming BB. The game has enough borderline $$$premium ships as it is.

AP spamming BB more likely. If 3x4, there is no need to buff RoF, maybe even a nerf. US super heavy AP shells are good enough there wouldn't be the need to buff to the reload. Alaska 12" already pen T8-10 BBs left and right. 14" will only do better.

3x3 14" if T7 (if there is a 2nd US BB line I'd rather see Lexington-class CC), 3x4 14" if T8.

 

8 hours ago, j0e90 said:

And there are only 2 NC class ships - Maine, Lousiana and Mississippi  are old pre treaty BBs. So would we just start making up new ships.

Uhhh... So what? I meant reusing the names, not the ships. The US has like 50 states. Plenty of names.

Edited by Paladinum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×