Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
1481052263

The Pan-Asian (Chinese) Cruisers is coming?

22 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3
[FHLJ]
Member
12 posts
521 battles

Pan-Asian (Chinese) Cruisers is :

 

1237845690_5cfcfce1bffb438558723748327ce5ea_E5BA94E7919E18-003.jpg.045b3c2593b10f88849b1a3bbe5569df.jpg

Tier 2  Yingrui (CL)

 

5e9830861d8c8b5dbec9e0f797ff5268_file.thumb.png.ec2b5eadb32d68a54ccde66960589eb1.png

Tier 3 Ninghai (CL)

 

1217560037_.png.920d95ea2491efb71eb5aacc9584ad41.png

Tier 4 Kaiji (CL)

 

1879379886_.png.fca47f7b954489b59f6ee43ae8fe65f8.png

Tier 5 Guangding (CL)

 

403959463_.png.871cfa48297e7f50eba5038d8772ead8.png

Tier 6 Hairong (CL)

 

1405485124_.png.6636ef13f53bbc6b5cce715c78ae046b.png

Tier 7 Songhu (CA)

 

1620867707_.png.7efbc6acf5c27897e92c867bf1d56b74.png

Tier 8 Tientsin (CA)

 

1543883515_.png.d0c4d21d38fa415309754e9bf482f7d8.png

Tier 9 Yangquan (CA)

 

77432106_.png.e97292141969b5700dbca5ef0c1a80af.png

Tier 10 Jingzhao (CB)

 

that is a (Edited) joke.

post-Tier 4' s Chinese Cruisers is fiction (sometimes), but this cruisers writted from the Koei-Tecmo' s game "Kurogane no Houkou 3".

 

Profanity, post edited

  • Funny 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
73 posts
1,374 battles

No, stop, just stop. Please.

The game does not need any more of such pure fiction that is even more fictional than Zao or Roon, not to say the related copyright issues of an already existed intellectual property product.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3
[FHLJ]
Member
12 posts
521 battles
14 分鐘前,Project45_Opytny 說:

No, stop, just stop. Please.

The game does not need any more of such pure fiction that is even more fictional than Zao or Roon, not to say the related copyright issues of an already existed intellectual property product.

but, enough.

 

(can swordfishes sunk the bismarck's asshole?)

  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2
[ELDER]
Member
14 posts
10,732 battles

I just noticed that there was the same discussion artical in Chines speaking community:cat_bubble:LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
73 posts
1,374 battles
2 minutes ago, _Evangeline said:

I just noticed that there was the same discussion artical in Chines speaking community:cat_bubble:LOL

And I attempted to prove that all these pure pipedream fantasties have little value, if any at all for this game-related aspects in that thread all this morning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
73 posts
1,374 battles
10 minutes ago, 1481052263 said:

but, enough.

 

(can swordfishes sunk the bismarck's asshole?)

So what is the relationship between the British Hunt for Bismarck and all your ahistorical fantasties?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48
[FORCE]
Member
151 posts
7,704 battles

As interesting as this line could have been, I say no. And it can't be Pan-Asian line if all ships are from a single navy.

 

Not to mention that up until tier 3 the only optional flag (alternative to the dragon flag) that actually makes sense is the Pan Blue flag which actually got the nerves of some players here.

Edited by Sir_Feather
grammatical errors

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
73 posts
1,374 battles
6 minutes ago, Sir_Feather said:

As interesting as this line could have been, I say no. And it can't be Pan-Asian line if all ships are from a single navy.

 

Not to mention that up until tier 3 the only optional flag (alternative to the dragon flag) that actually makes sense is the Pan Blue flag which actually got the nerves of some players here.

Putting political issues aside, the whole line is made up of pure ahistorical fictions the original poster made up not long before.

Even if Zao, Roon, Hindenburg and Herni IV have already made their way into the game, I do not think that such fantasties that have absolutely no link to naval history of the actual world have any value beyond potential alternative-history literature works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48
[FORCE]
Member
151 posts
7,704 battles
Just now, Project45_Opytny said:

Putting political issues aside, the whole line is made up of pure ahistorical fictions the original poster made up not long before.

Even if Zao, Roon, Hindenburg and Herni IV have already made their way into the game, I do not think that such fantasties that have absolutely no link to naval history of the actual world have any value beyond potential alternative-history literature works.

I second that. This line could be more fantasy than the Soviet BB line.

The ROC Navy at that time could barely make a full-fledged warship. Ninghai for example; had to use the outdated armaments, and historically ended up being mauled by the more-modernized Japanese ships. She was raised back and rebuilt by the Japanese to be an escort ship, and eventually sunk permanently by an American submarine, USS Shad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
262
[LUOMU]
Super Tester
1,414 posts
10,311 battles
24 minutes ago, Sir_Feather said:

I second that. This line could be more fantasy than the Soviet BB line.

The ROC Navy at that time could barely make a full-fledged warship. Ninghai for example; had to use the outdated armaments, and historically ended up being mauled by the more-modernized Japanese ships. She was raised back and rebuilt by the Japanese to be an escort ship, and eventually sunk permanently by an American submarine, USS Shad.

The armaments were not the main drawback of the Ning Hai class. 3*2 140mm was quite respectable for her size. While major navies were heading towards heavy cruisers and larger CLs, the 5.5in was still a fairly good scout cruiser gun. (IJN designed the gun as a replacement for the 6"/45 type 41, with lighter shells but the same bursting charge to facilitate faster reloading for the physically weaker Japanese crew)

However, her size is tiny and her machinery was incompetent. Machinery was the most expensive and technically demanding part of a warship at the time, high quality machinery is a display of industrial strength. The Russians would order machinery from the Brits for their high speed destroyers pre WWII, and the Brits would even design entire cruisers around these sets when the war broke out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
73 posts
1,374 battles
44 minutes ago, Sir_Feather said:

I second that. This line could be more fantasy than the Soviet BB line.

The ROC Navy at that time could barely make a full-fledged warship. Ninghai for example; had to use the outdated armaments, and historically ended up being mauled by the more-modernized Japanese ships. She was raised back and rebuilt by the Japanese to be an escort ship, and eventually sunk permanently by an American submarine, USS Shad.

No matter how "fantasty" the Soviet battleships may be, there exist their blueprints lying somewhere in archieves in Russia, and probably Ukraine. At least the existence of their related projects are confirmed for sure.

What the OP posted here in contrast are merely his own fictional works that would need a significantly altered universe to exist and work.

13 minutes ago, HMS_Swiftsure_08 said:

The armaments were not the main drawback of the Ning Hai class. 3*2 140mm was quite respectable for her size. While major navies were heading towards heavy cruisers and larger CLs, the 5.5in was still a fairly good scout cruiser gun. (IJN designed the gun as a replacement for the 6"/45 type 41, with lighter shells but the same bursting charge to facilitate faster reloading for the physically weaker Japanese crew)

However, her size is tiny and her machinery was incompetent. Machinery was the most expensive and technically demanding part of a warship at the time, high quality machinery is a display of industrial strength. The Russians would order machinery from the Brits for their high speed destroyers pre WWII, and the Brits would even design entire cruisers around these sets when the war broke out.

In some aspects you can view the Ning Hai-class as a unique crossover of light cruisers, coastal patrol gunboats/sloops and coast defence ships. The Chinese Navy under Kuomintang Regime are chronically undertrained and underfunded and plagued by warlord factionism, and the choice of coal-burning boilers and triple expansion steam engines actually suited the Navy's rudimentry maintenance capablities and intended role of crew training, coastal support and deterence against rival warlords then. They are ill-suited to modern naval warfare of course.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
781
[TLS]
Member
1,342 posts
16,811 battles

2 cents: More ships when the balancing among the already in circulation (and soon to be in circulation) ships is not even settled? Please. No.

Edited by dejiko_nyo
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
295
[151ST]
Member
1,176 posts
5,691 battles

I swear if we get another fictional line before RM DD, CL/A, BB, Commonwealth DD, CL, IJN CL... ...

Yes that's right USN BB split can bloody well wait too, even an IJN BB/BC split would have more actual ships and designs!

Edited by S4pp3R
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
295
[151ST]
Member
1,176 posts
5,691 battles

Actually add RN CAs to that as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Administrator
208 posts

Interesting opinions 🙂 Well if we have any change to talk about this topic, we will refer to all the comments here.

Thank you for all the detailed concerns, commanders!

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,857 posts
6,025 battles
23 minutes ago, S4pp3R said:

I swear if we get another fictional line before RM DD, CL/A, BB, Commonwealth DD, CL, IJN CL... ...

Yes that's right USN BB split can bloody well wait too, even an IJN BB/BC split would have more actual ships and designs!

IJN CL? That line is probably more fictitious than US BB or IJN BB split.

And how can IJN BB split has more real ships and designs than US BB split?

Edited by Paladinum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
295
[151ST]
Member
1,176 posts
5,691 battles
48 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

IJN CL? That line is probably more fictitious than US BB or IJN BB split.

And how can IJN BB split has more real ships and designs than US BB split?

IJN CLs can easily get to T8 with a Mogami(155) variant as 8.

IJN BB split would be BB/BC. Half the line are already BCs anyways and the differing traits are already obvious.

Pretty much all remaining classes of USN BB are almost the same as existing tech tree ships.

The main exception being South Dakota class of the 20s.

New York - Nevada

New Mexico - Pennsylvania - Tennessee

North Carolina - South Dakota (30s)

You basically would need to go down different hull refit options, as they are all almost identical as built.

Giving a 'secondary' line is simply a cop-out when there are so many other nation lines that need attention first.

I'm not saying don't do a USN BB split but can we have lines that the game needs and splits that actually make sense with existing ships being used done first. Splitting USN BB line and creating a made-up gimmick to differentiate them IMO is lazy and something we don't need anytime soon.

At the very least we need RM lines and Commonwealth lines first, preferably the others I listed as well.

This is not even to mention easily done USN IJN second CV lines (I know would be unpopular).

Edited by S4pp3R

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
212
[SMOKE]
Member
653 posts
10,034 battles

I do not totally agree with the ahistorical part , but I do agree that the game do not at this moment need yet another line of ships ... we have seen ships that are now power creeped and obsolete by changes to the game and badly in need of re-spec to reflect the ship population and density in game ... most tech line ships are still spec as they were before the proliferation of Radar, reworked CV, Super Cruiser, more OP BB etc etc etc ....  Not only that , in game mechanics that deny many ships proper play by not giving them proper set of weapon and performance to perform in game a current meta and their said tier ( yes, lack of real effective AA certainly not just the single one ) ..

No what the game need is total re balancing of all ships, every ships, all class, all type and all tier to made each and every one possible to play out, pay decent and play well ( if the player exhibit good game-play ) right now many are specified to fail ... talk say the whole IJN DD line, the mid to low tier Soviet DD, the T3, T4, T5 cruisers ( guess what they think when he game present them with confrontation against 3 CV a side ) or BB that cannot start even to defend itself ( cause the cruiser can't which because the DD cannot go out to vanguard ) ... there's so many issues.

And read what all these new line of ships, god WG give supply crate so people can pay to progress ( without grinding the low to mid tier ) and what about all the premium ships , especially super cruisers ... that is classic pay to win .. when the game is all about that ... players who do get into the game to enjoy all the different ships in a fair playing field is no longer possible ..

Edited by Mechfori
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,857 posts
6,025 battles
41 minutes ago, S4pp3R said:

IJN BB split would be BB/BC. Half the line are already BCs anyways and the differing traits are already obvious.

 Pretty much all remaining classes of USN BB are almost the same as existing tech tree ships.

And the 2nd IJN BB line has about... zero completed ship.

 

41 minutes ago, S4pp3R said:

IJN CLs can easily get to T8 with a Mogami(155) variant as 8.

Which one would be Tier 7 then? Oyodo, which has neither the HP pool, the amount of guns (nor gun size), no torp (for a IJN cruiser), very long historical reload?

Edited by Paladinum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
212
[SMOKE]
Member
653 posts
10,034 battles

IMHO ... a line split does not equate needing to fill the line all through .. Soviet Torp boat and IJN Gunboat had only high tier entries, and equally BC line ( which is not IJN alone, this could apply to almost al the current BB lineup ), but filling a line without the top / high tier entries also present issue in game , namely not much drive to play the said line since it will not give progression to the top .. actually there is already a kind of reel back for all veteran players to not to play low to mid tier which IMHO is not healthy to the game , yes we can all play high tier but if al the old hands do not or care not to play mid tier / low tier that mean those tiers are filled only with casual , newbies and further erode the game quality and of course further lessen those causual / new players desire to play the game and further the progression ..

We already know even way before the CV rework there was already tendency to just race to T8 and beyond and now WG made it so you can pay to ignore the low to mid tier ( Mission to get ships ) its further hampering the low to mid tier gaming experience for ALL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
295
[151ST]
Member
1,176 posts
5,691 battles
8 hours ago, Paladinum said:

And the 2nd IJN BB line has about... zero completed ship.

Which one would be Tier 7 then? Oyodo, which has neither the HP pool, the amount of guns (nor gun size), no torp (for a IJN cruiser), very long historical reload?

There have been discussions on the options for IJN CLs and BCs before, I'm not going to get drawn into those arguments, Oyodo is an option (oh WG would never pad a statistic on a ship for balance reasons would they?) :fish_palm:
There are other options including designs or mince a design together base on other options in the tree.

The way I look at it, the splits should be prioritised like such:

  1. Ships exist in game in a line but don't match the line.
  2. Ships differ from existing in-game ship lines
  3. Ships were built or designed

In this case, for IJN BCs (to address your point) Myogi, Kongo and Amagi are already in the game and they differ from the IJN BB line. They only really fit in as far as gun calibour. There are many BC options as far as IJN designs, so it's easy enough to fix up a line based on these. Having a Dreadnought-based line and a BC-based line. As I said earlier, the reason I would prioritise this line is because the three ships differ from the existing IJN BBs in that line. I don't expect it to be done soon but I would hope it would be done before other nations get a BB-split considering the issue has been there since launch.

This is not even to mention that unless that do some absurd changing of USN ships built, they'd essentially be making up a line based on designs anyways in which case I would say that making IJN BB/BC line 'make sense' aka split it should be a higher priority.

IJN CLs is much the same, except that because they actually differ from existing IJN ship lines and they did built to at least 6-7 and with Mogami/alternative it's easy enough to get to T8. Again, USN BB options are either built (same as existing line) or theoretical in which case, other ship lines first.

You have every right to disagree and I respect that, my original point is that in view of things, a USN BB line split should be right at the bottom of the priority list considering we don't even have Regia Marina or Commonwealth lines.

7 hours ago, Mechfori said:

IMHO ... a line split does not equate needing to fill the line all through .. Soviet Torp boat and IJN Gunboat had only high tier entries, and equally BC line ( which is not IJN alone, this could apply to almost al the current BB lineup ), but filling a line without the top / high tier entries also present issue in game , namely not much drive to play the said line since it will not give progression to the top .. actually there is already a kind of reel back for all veteran players to not to play low to mid tier which IMHO is not healthy to the game , yes we can all play high tier but if al the old hands do not or care not to play mid tier / low tier that mean those tiers are filled only with casual , newbies and further erode the game quality and of course further lessen those causual / new players desire to play the game and further the progression ..

We already know even way before the CV rework there was already tendency to just race to T8 and beyond and now WG made it so you can pay to ignore the low to mid tier ( Mission to get ships ) its further hampering the low to mid tier gaming experience for ALL

Agreed.

Although WG have demonstrated that when they release a new line they want to have the T10 available straight up and the ability for players to jump to T8. I don't agree with this and I end up playing through a line even if I have the higher tier options as it's basically robbing me of the fun of playing different ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
673
[CLAY]
Member
1,182 posts
8,076 battles
20 hours ago, dejiko_nyo said:

2 cents: More ships when the balancing among the already in circulation (and soon to be in circulation) ships is not even settled? Please. No.

Agreed. There are now so many ships that a lot of the older lines are powercrept to oblivion.

Also... where’s the Italian line?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×