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

[Poll] Paper Ships

[Poll] Paper Ships  

37 members have voted

  1. 1. Has WG been making too many paper ships recently?

    • Yes
      31
    • No
      6

31 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,138
[FORCE]
Member
2,212 posts
11,736 battles

I'm not against the addition of paper ships in the game. But I think WG has gone a little overboard (pun intended) with them.

 

When will San Diego be added into the game, WeeGee?

Spoiler

 

[Weeb mode deacttivated}

I mean instead of adding paper ships whose blueprints are not clearly verified, how could WG forget to add the 2nd most decorated ship in the US Navy? WG could have added her during the peak days of CV rework instead of that one Russian DD at T9.

 

Her main characteristic could have been the strongest AA in her own tier due to her historical records. I'd suggest her to be at T8 because she was supposed to be better than Atlanta. And probably sell her as a coal ship, which could serve as the first T8 coal ship in the game.

Why should she be at T8? Well, the T7 already hosts her two sisters. And selling a better (and more affordable) Atlanta at the same tier could draw some ire from some Atlanta owners. WG also could have already managed to balance her "potentially OP" stats with the long term MM issue (WG did not fix the whole issue on the last update).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,138
[FORCE]
Member
2,212 posts
11,736 battles
29 minutes ago, dejiko_nyo said:

All paper ships should be subjected to +1000% flammability. 

Or the same flammability as German ships. Those ships get roasted even faster now....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
673
[LBAS]
Member
4,729 posts
10,736 battles
10 minutes ago, Sir_Feather said:

Or the same flammability as German ships. Those ships get roasted even faster now....

And best spot for HE citadel

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
142
[TDA]
Super Tester_
426 posts
10,372 battles

I would be more inclined to say "WG have added too many USN ships" recently.

Stick a Stars and Stripes on a ship and NA will eat them up, and from a business perspective who could blame WG for making the most of it. I'm sure over time there will be USN ships introduced named after every State, City, President etc plus whatever paper ships can be put out.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,325
Member
4,532 posts
8,629 battles

Not really.

I will say this: I don't care if a ship is paper or fantasy, if it's balanced I accept it. I'm a simple man, the more ships in the game the better. But those ships better have clear and approachable ways to get them aka NOT the Rubbish Burnheap.

This is simply a sudden surge of questionable (cash-grabbing) decisions rather than too many high tier "freemium" ships.

About historical ships, yeah, sometimes I do wonder if WG are picking ships very... rightly. There are so many ships that have significant service records and where the heck are they? USS Johnston, SMS Seydlitz, HMS Repulse, etc.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,138
[FORCE]
Member
2,212 posts
11,736 battles
30 minutes ago, Kamanah said:

I would be more inclined to say "WG have added too many USN ships" recently.

Stick a Stars and Stripes on a ship and NA will eat them up, and from a business perspective who could blame WG for making the most of it. I'm sure over time there will be USN ships introduced named after every State, City, President etc plus whatever paper ships can be put out.

I think the newest USN ships added this year are not as much as filling a full line. Alaska, Benham, Hill, Wichita, AL Montpelier, Georgia,  Somers, and Ohio; 8 ships in total. But in the same period, WG added a full Russian BB line (only Gangut & Izmail made it past the drawing board), some Russian freemiums, and some others I can't recall now.

26 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

Not really.

I will say this: I don't care if a ship is paper or fantasy, if it's balanced I accept it. I'm a simple man, the more ships in the game the better. But those ships better have clear and approachable ways to get them aka NOT the Rubbish Burnheap.

This is simply a sudden surge of questionable (cash-grabbing) decisions rather than too many high tier "freemium" ships.

About historical ships, yeah, sometimes I do wonder if WG are picking ships very... rightly. There are so many ships that have significant service records and where the heck are they? USS Johnston, SMS Seydlitz, HMS Repulse, etc.

You said it better than I did. And if WG has no problem with adding some ships with little to no service records, why do they not add HMS Prince of Wales? Her records were short, but more wholesome than these paper ships. She's also the only Battle of Denmark Strait participant that does not exist in the game.

Edited by Sir_Feather

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
680
[SALT]
Member
2,019 posts
10,542 battles

Well, I preffer paper than RL Copy pasta ships

Cleaveland - montpelier, Boise -  Nuevo de Julio, KGV - DOY, Hipper - old Prinz

WG STOP Making Boring, Lazy Premium !

 

 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,325
Member
4,532 posts
8,629 battles
38 minutes ago, humusz said:

Well, I preffer paper than RL Copy pasta ships

Cleaveland - montpelier, Boise -  Nuevo de Julio, KGV - DOY, Hipper - old Prinz

WG STOP Making Boring, Lazy Premium !

Fletcher - Black, Kidd, Chung Mu :Smile_trollface: Try to beat that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
680
[SALT]
Member
2,019 posts
10,542 battles
24 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

Fletcher - Black, Kidd, Chung Mu :Smile_trollface: Try to beat that

at least those were slightly diffrent

American ship especialy many copy pasta 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
175
[LGND]
Member
493 posts
12,413 battles
30 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

Fletcher - Black, Kidd, Chung Mu :Smile_trollface: Try to beat that

ARP Myoko,ARP Nachi,ARP Haguro,ARP Ashigara....
ARP Kongo,ARP Hiei,ARP Haruna,ARP Kirishima.....
I beat you now gip me the prize  :Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,040
[MRI]
Member
3,453 posts
14,859 battles
27 minutes ago, Gesterbein said:

ARP Myoko,ARP Nachi,ARP Haguro,ARP Ashigara....
ARP Kongo,ARP Hiei,ARP Haruna,ARP Kirishima.....
I beat you now gip me the prize  :Smile_trollface:

You forgot Eastern and Southern Dragon. :Smile_teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,325
Member
4,532 posts
8,629 battles
53 minutes ago, Gesterbein said:

ARP Myoko,ARP Nachi,ARP Haguro,ARP Ashigara....
ARP Kongo,ARP Hiei,ARP Haruna,ARP Kirishima.....
I beat you now gip me the prize  :Smile_trollface:

 

51 minutes ago, humusz said:

^

Grats

You won a Giveaway by Paladinum:Smile_trollface:

No. 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,283
[LBAS]
[LBAS]
Modder, Member
6,553 posts
40,237 battles

more designs more ships more money

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,325
Member
4,532 posts
8,629 battles

WG: "We fully intend to bring ALL the ships presented during and between WW1 and WW2 into the game"

Edited by Paladinum
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,009
[CLAY]
Member
2,667 posts
12,042 battles

Yes and no.

I’m cool with WG filling out tech trees with paper ships where no other ships are available. And they’re going to have to do it to fill in certain ship lines (I’m less cool with WG prioritising largely paper navies over navies that existed).

Its where we start getting a bunch of high tier premium paper ships that I have a problem with. Especially when the resources could otherwise be spent on real life ships. Yes, I know there were fewer real life ships, especially CA, CL and BB, that could be T9 plus, but I think there’s too many premium T9 &10s anyway.

And I agree with @Kamanah, they are putting out too many USN AND Russian high tier ships.

I get the feeling that because they removed Kronstadt, Missouri and Musashi, they think that those ships don’t count towards the total.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,283
[LBAS]
[LBAS]
Modder, Member
6,553 posts
40,237 battles
1 minute ago, Grygus_Triss said:

I get the feeling that because they removed Kronstadt, Missouri and Musashi, they think that those ships don’t count towards the total.

plus Benham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,009
[CLAY]
Member
2,667 posts
12,042 battles
36 minutes ago, dejiko_nyo said:

This gun destroyer I want:

SDF-1_Macross_Ship_Small.jpg

...does this mean we can actually aim DP guns UP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
311
[LBAS]
Beta Tester
875 posts
5,777 battles
4 時間前、humusz の発言:

WG STOP Making Boring, Lazy Premium !

Wowlazy Gaming: it's easy money for us and fools certain players fall for it. *backs to vodka slumber*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,325
Member
4,532 posts
8,629 battles
6 hours ago, humusz said:

WG STOP Making Boring, Lazy Premium !

WG STOP making LAZY ship lines with only EVEN tiers!!!

Edited by Paladinum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
993
[OAKUM]
Member
2,105 posts
15,825 battles

I have an idea!

How about a imaginary paper version, of a imaginary paper ship?

 

Ordrazz

  • Funny 1

Share this post


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

×