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

New French T10 Premium the Marceau

46 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
70 posts
2,878 battles

asdj0k8p8ng31.png?fit=1920,1080&ssl=1

Who the hell is this guy making these HE spamming nightmares at WG, it can do up to 50 knots running the engine boost not only can it spam HE but its AP is also rather good and it has a Damage saturating hull like the Kleber its also difficult to sink not to mention the high arc of the shells so it can camp behind an island with impunity. 

 

WHO! and WHY! nobody wanted this the community wasn't going, YOu KnOW wHat We REALly NeeD? SMolensk BuT AS a 50 knot DEstRoyer. my only hope is that this is going to be a steel ship and that i wont see to many of them.

https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Marceau

 

 

-8bc.gif

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,118
[FORCE]
Member
2,183 posts
11,609 battles
7 minutes ago, Skarhabek said:

You never see Halland??

Halland only has 2 twin 120 mm guns, no saturation gimmick, and 35 knot top speed. This thing has 4 twin 127mm guns, saturation gimmick, and freaking fast.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,297
Member
4,493 posts
8,613 battles

Flamuu is right when he calls his test ship day 

TONE DEAF tuesday.

Where's T47 or T53 class? Why is there this paper ship instead?

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,118
[FORCE]
Member
2,183 posts
11,609 battles
1 minute ago, Paladinum said:

Where's T47 or T53 class? Why is there this paper ship instead?

You forgot one more question. Why does WG keep adding French boats into the game?:Smile_izmena:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
70 posts
2,878 battles
3 minutes ago, Sir_Feather said:

You forgot one more question. Why does WG keep adding French boats into the game?:Smile_izmena:

I honestly have no idea my best guess is that it's to show that there is no Russian bias, but why the hell is it always a french ship? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
70 posts
2,878 battles

With the types of ships that are in the game now why cant we have a proper HMAS Vampire instead of these stupid paper ships.Vampire%20copy.jpgb39c225b9488881cd71ad1b4b23bee14.jpg

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
518
[MD]
[MD]
Member
561 posts
2,886 battles

Out of all interesting, more balanced and HISTORICAL ships like Split and Tre Kronor, they instead make an imaginative bullcrap overpowered 'warship'?

did they somehow lose their mind?

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,118
[FORCE]
Member
2,183 posts
11,609 battles
1 minute ago, Der_Wustenfuchs said:

With the types of ships that are in the game now why cant we have a proper HMAS Vampire instead of these stupid paper ships.Vampire%20copy.jpgb39c225b9488881cd71ad1b4b23bee14.jpg

That could have been the first (and more acceptable) T10 Commonwealth ship. WG went too overboard with the amount of paper ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,297
Member
4,493 posts
8,613 battles

WG can easily make the T53 the T10 premium when 2nd French loli line comes, exactly like Halland and Smaland.

But no, paper ship instead of a very balancable real version BECAUSE REASONS.

 

WHERE THE BLEEP IS HOTEL CALIF BTW???

Edited by Paladinum
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
524
[KAMI]
Member
1,503 posts
12,352 battles

RU server calling out the french bias from wargaming early

 

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,973
[CLAY]
Member
2,642 posts
11,962 battles
56 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

Flamuu is right when he calls his test ship day 

TONE DEAF tuesday.

Where's T47 or T53 class? Why is there this paper ship instead?

We need more T2 to T7 historically significant ships.

Not T10 paper abominations.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,297
Member
4,493 posts
8,613 battles
Just now, Grygus_Triss said:

We need more T2 to T7 historically significant ships.

Not T10 paper abominations.

I don't mind paper ships. Not at all.

But when WG decided to include a paper ship instead of a historical version that can be at the same tier and is much easier to balance, I call BS

Why the heck?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,355 posts
5,718 battles
32 minutes ago, Earl_of_Arland said:

Out of all interesting, more balanced and HISTORICAL ships like Split and Tre Kronor, they instead make an imaginative bullcrap overpowered 'warship'?

did they somehow lose their mind?

Or as what has been suggested here, even if we talk about French destroyers, we can have some historical choices like Le Hardi, Le Fier or T47-class ships.

Also historically speaking the name Marceau has been used by the French for a German Type 1936A (mob) destroyer, Z-31, that has been transferred post-war as war reparations.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,973
[CLAY]
Member
2,642 posts
11,962 battles
13 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

I don't mind paper ships. Not at all.

But when WG decided to include a paper ship instead of a historical version that can be at the same tier and is much easier to balance, I call BS

Why the heck?

I don’t mind paper ships. It’s paper abominations I don’t like :Smile-_tongue:

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
484
[AN-DO]
Member
654 posts
9,659 battles

I've run out of smileys making my way down this thread, everybody here is correct and have valid points. I really have no idea what WGs thinking is and their planning process because they seem to constantly and consistently go against the wishes of the player-base. Nobody has asked for more HE spammers, or even super cruisers yet these are the sort of things they give us. They certainly operate on a very unique "logic" because it certainly doesn't seem obvious or logical to us.

Edited by blauflamme22
  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
839
[LBAS]
Member
1,720 posts
3,412 battles
25 minutes ago, blauflamme22 said:

I've run out of smileys making my way down this thread, everybody here is correct and have valid points. I really have no idea what WGs thinking is and their planning process because they seem to constantly and consistently go against the wishes of the player-base. Nobody has asked for more HE spammers, or even super cruisers yet these are the sort of things they give us. They certainly operate on a very unique "logic" because it certainly doesn't seem obvious or logical to us.

WG listen to the spreadsheet, not our complain. That is why we need to Rigging it.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,297
Member
4,493 posts
8,613 battles

Not even the interesting kind of HE spammer. It's a French DD. High speed = disgustingly hard to hit.

 

As usual, I am your resident cruiser main, and I'm here just to say: The game needs more heavy cruisers.

Oregon City. San Diego. Blucher. Tone. Maya 1943. Any 203 Mogami. Duquesne. Suffren. Fiume. Bolzano. You name it.

Bonus point if the ship has: German high damage + US autobounce angle + no HE/SAP (important). A serious AP spammer that is only good in the hands of a skilled player, not potatoes. Or a cruiser main like me (lol)

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,564
[TLS]
Member
3,924 posts
19,935 battles

You know, the faster the ship, the worse the sigma/dispersion should be? You cannot really load and aim accurate in such choppy high speeds. I propose a sigma of 0.2.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[LGND]
Member
485 posts
12,362 battles
42 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

Oregon City. San Diego. Blucher. Tone. Maya 1943. Any 203 Mogami. Duquesne. Suffren. Fiume. Bolzano. You name it.

that San Diego possible will be Collaboration ship like Montpelier lmao....
with bonus commander who yelling "Watashi wa Numba 1" everytime she kill a ship... :Smile_trollface:

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,973
[CLAY]
Member
2,642 posts
11,962 battles
36 minutes ago, dejiko_nyo said:

You know, the faster the ship, the worse the sigma/dispersion should be? You cannot really load and aim accurate in such choppy high speeds. I propose a sigma of 0.2.

Not really relating to your suggestion, but This would be a very interesting game if your accuracy changed with your speed and movement.

Fast ships would be very inaccurate, while BBs would be much more so. More people would use concealment to bring ship slower in order to fire accurately.

An interesting concept, but not really suitable for the Arcady aspect of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
839
[LBAS]
Member
1,720 posts
3,412 battles
31 minutes ago, Grygus_Triss said:

Not really relating to your suggestion, but This would be a very interesting game if your accuracy changed with your speed and movement.

Fast ships would be very inaccurate, while BBs would be much more so. More people would use concealment to bring ship slower in order to fire accurately.

An interesting concept, but not really suitable for the Arcady aspect of the game.

World of tank.....

 

1 hour ago, Paladinum said:

Not even the interesting kind of HE spammer. It's a French DD. High speed = disgustingly hard to hit.

 

As usual, I am your resident cruiser main, and I'm here just to say: The game needs more heavy cruisers.

Oregon City. San Diego. Blucher. Tone. Maya 1943. Any 203 Mogami. Duquesne. Suffren. Fiume. Bolzano. You name it.

Bonus point if the ship has: German high damage + US autobounce angle + no HE/SAP (important). A serious AP spammer that is only good in the hands of a skilled player, not potatoes. Or a cruiser main like me (lol)

Also remember krupp AP sux, make a Cruiser :

1. AP only like British CL

2. High Damage+HIGH PENETRATION

3. Flat ARC

 

we need more T8 lower Cruiser with repair party. Adition of Brits CA is good one.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
5 posts
5,111 battles
6 hours ago, Der_Wustenfuchs said:

With the types of ships that are in the game now why cant we have a proper HMAS Vampire instead of these stupid paper ships.Vampire%20copy.jpgb39c225b9488881cd71ad1b4b23bee14.jpg

The Vamps is already in game as the T10 Daring.  The pictures of her are after her extensive refit. Torps were removed early 70's. Great ship to serve on. Now berthed in Darling harbour at the Sydney maritime museum

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,297
Member
4,493 posts
8,613 battles
Just now, VJZC_DD11 said:

The Vamps is already in game as the T10 Daring.  The pictures of her are after her extensive refit. Torps were removed early 70's. Great ship to serve on. Now berthed in Darling harbour at the Sydney maritime museum

Premium clones are a thing. May even give her a Speed Boost in exchange for the Hydro.

However, "Vampire" is already in the game as a TIER THREE destroyer! Tier three! Imagine that!

Share this post


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

×