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

What is the Historical Reasons behind Gimmicks?

11 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

635
[CLAY]
[CLAY]
Member
641 posts
3,300 battles

Hello everyone,

Why's that some national tech trees have unique 'gimmicks' behind them? Like the French MBRB or Russian Radars?

I don't understand the logic behind them. Sure, USN has radar and that's logical, but the MN MBRB? Is it some sort of auto-loader tech related? And the Russian radar that has long range radar even though at that time RN was way ahead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
289
[NCOTS]
Member
457 posts
11,080 battles
47 minutes ago, Earl_of_Arland said:

Like the French MBRB or Russian Radars

For these 2 I think its more of an arcade related decisions rather than historical related, as these 2 gimmicks can make both lines/ships more attractive to players. Especially the MRMB, if I am not wrong speeding up a loading process is kind of impossible (yeah, adrenaline rush I am looking at you as well) as firing a naval gun has several steps and halving them is nigh impossible. And the Russian radars are mounted on paper ships so... (except the Chapayev but its a post war ship and I can't find relevant data on radar range, maybe its classified stuffs)

But some of the gimmicks are historical like Des Moines' reload, since its an auto-loader and the pre-buffed Des Moines has the exact reload time as the historical one. (not sure if this is called gimmick or not)

There should be more as the thread continues but I can't think of more as of now, need more people and info to enlighten me with knowledge 😄

Edited by rookieFTW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
704
[SALT]
Member
2,064 posts
10,542 battles

Russian :

- Radar, The Russian did make very advanced radar. but it was in cold war to modern era. in Vietnam from all US aircraft shoot down (from whole 3.370 of them) 60% was shoot by Radar Guided Anti Aircraft Gun, 31 % was shoot down by Anti air Missile made of the USSR. the whole Stealth Aircraft, Electronic warfare, and Air Defense Suppresion was result of those lesson that got spanked by Russian Radars.

its not make sense from WW2 Perspective, but Russian Radar is indeed logical from Cold war perspective. Especialy if you see, High Tier Russian Ships is basicly born around the era 1950-1965. for example stuff like Chapayev, which was designed in 1935, have long delay, and design update that its end up commisioned at 1950 with Cold war era suite. 

 

-Long Range Radar, if you ok-ish with "cold war" era traits. the Russian did have Longer reach radar on Avrg compared to Allied forces. that because their Peak power frequency is apparently Higher. but it also lack of resolution and higher downtime.

 

- Railguns, its actual origin was doctrinal. After purging of Russian Imperial Navy officer following the defeat of Tsarist goverment. The New Soviet Navy were inhabit by Young Naval officer that bright and full of Ideas. The Imperial Tsarist Navy were embodied the concept of Bluewater ocean going Navy which basicly embodies the same mind of Royal Navy, thats why they push "warm water port" policy which the Ambition were quelled by Defeat of their Naval fleet in Tsuhima. The New restructured "Young" Soviet Navy shift its policy, rather try to be Global Naval power. they shift the focus on being Regional Navy - which is a more Defensive posture compared to Tsarist Navy.

What the Connection with Railguns you ask ?

Those more defensive thinking, allow Soviet Navy to pursue a more decisive fight, closer to their Home port or Coastal area against potentialy Stronger enemy Navy. one of the concept to achive those objective was using Higher Velocity Gun, which allow more accurate shoot thus engagement is shorter and more decisive. but High velocity gun, have big Tradeoff. High Pressure + long Barrel cause very significant Barrel wear. a Normal avrg standard British and American Naval gun barrel can shoot 350 shells before its deemed Unsafe and become hazard. but High velocity gun only can shoot around 100-150 Shells ! - (which mean its only good for 1 or at max 2 short battles, before the Barrel turn into "Flowers" - litteraly)

That would posse a Problem, as Replacing Barrels require a ship to be Drydocked. There significant downtime involved where ship unable to fight. and if you have Global spanning interest, you cant sent your Fleet home after 1 or 2 Naval Battles. but a Coastal oriented Navies, dont have that problem. Soviet Navy will only concern lies in smaller bodies of water like artic sea, Baltic or Black sea near their homeland.

The same Navies that have same mindset was Italy which only concern is Mediteranian Sea. and Kriegsmarine (not Kaiserlich Navy).

also as Bonus, The actual  USN Railguns can only shoot 8 times before the Barrels is no longer usable, The Barrel wear is the price when pursuing High Velocity Gun - which still hold true today

 

Nowdays the modern term was Blue water Navy, for Navy that build with Global Spanning interest in mind. and Green Water Navy for more Teritorial, Coastal Defensive Navy Focused. IJN, USN, RN was practicly the Blue water Navy, as their navy built with Oceanwide interest in mind.

 

other Soviet Trait, like fast turret, magic shells, diffrent DCP, absurd tankiness have no Historical connection AFAIK.

Edited by humusz
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
741
[LBAS]
Member
4,936 posts
11,053 battles

15 April 1912 

2 o'clock 50 minutes 

The disaster the world never forget

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,184
[MRI]
Member
3,615 posts
15,541 battles

Most of the gimmicks are purely for gameplay reasons, but some do have a historical basis. For example, the Torpedo Reload Boosters on some IJN DDs.

In real life most DDs did not have a reload of torpedoes, so once they launched their torps that was it. They had to sail back to port in order to reload their torpedo tubes. The exception were the IJN DDs, some of which carried 1 set of torpedo reloads. So they could fire a salvo of torps and reload once without having to return to port. In WoWs this is represented by some of them having the Torpedo Reload Booster.

In fact if you look at their models in port you can see which of them carried the torpedo reloads - they are those long rectangular magazines positioned just beside their torpedo launchers. The only exception is Hatsuharu, which has the torpedo magazines but doesn't have access to TRB. I guess WG thinks TRB at T6 would be too imbalanced...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,449 posts
6,185 battles
2 hours ago, rookieFTW said:

Especially the MRMB, if I am not wrong speeding up a loading process is kind of impossible (yeah, adrenaline rush I am looking at you as well) as firing a naval gun has several steps and halving them is nigh impossible

I've heard vaguely that the real-life French naval architects did develop a "gimmick" of faster reload (of course still incomparable to the fully-automatic reloading naval guns, like those aboard Des Moines, from the late 1940s) in the 1930s. Though few detailed information about that can be recalled at present. And AFAIK many French tanks in WG's WoT feature "clip-reloading guns" with a similiar operational principle.

It can also be argued that the reload time of many naval guns have been buffed and tweaked in this game for balancing reasons; for example, the 180-mm guns aboard Kirov and Molotov (much faster than historical values) and Imperial German 380-mm guns aboard Bayern (a bit slower according to tests conducted with SMS Baden by the British, probably for balancing reasons), as well as the more obvious examples of Aoba and Duca d'Aosta.

In a similiar fashion a number of the "features", or "gimmicks", has their historical roots: I have read about that KM Prinz Eugen features a sophisticated hyrdophone system, a device rarely fitted aboard such ships, in real life, and German naval architecture has been sticking to the "classic" turtleback armor scheme even in late 1930s despite its increasing obsolescence. The French and the Italian has historically boasted some of the fastest ships among their peers during the interwar period, like the famous Le Fantasque-class and Mogador-class destroyer leaders of France, and the Italian Condottieri-class cruisers and Capitani Romani-class flotilla leaders; and I have also come across proposals of Italian Regia Marina battleship lines feature gimmicks resemble the current SAP with respective historical references. And the bow-tanking feature of Soviet battleships is said to be a long-lasting "trauma" inherited from the Tsarist period, originated from the disastrous, crushing defeat of Tsushima back to the pre-dreadnought era. Real-life Japanese destroyers have featured spare torpedo storages and fast reloading system aboard which would give them a considerable advantage under ideal situations.

Though it must be admitted that many of the gimmicks are completely intended for game-balance and "implement something novel" purposes; like why British light cruisers, bar Belfast, only have access to a gimmicky variant of AP shells, why Japanese heavy cruisers feature such pinpoint accuracy (though besides the obvious intent of buffing a powercrept line that has existed since the launch of this game, the Japanese, taking their absolute quantity disadvantage into consideration, have especially emphasized personnel training during the interwar period to strive for a quality counterbalance), and why Pan-Asian ships feature deep water torpedos.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,293
[FORCE]
Member
2,479 posts
12,348 battles

For "balans" reasons, radars are not working exactly like they actually did, either. I'm not taking about their ability to scan through islands, but I'm talking about their finite duration. At the same time though, all ships have minimap although they don't have radar. How?

But yes this is an arcade game with a little sprinkle of historical stuffs. We have ships that can load an absurd amount of shells/torps despite their small displacements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
535
[LNA]
Member
2,050 posts
14,176 battles
32 minutes ago, Sir_Feather said:

For "balans" reasons, radars are not working exactly like they actually did, either. I'm not taking about their ability to scan through islands, but I'm talking about their finite duration. At the same time though, all ships have minimap although they don't have radar. How?

But yes this is an arcade game with a little sprinkle of historical stuffs. We have ships that can load an absurd amount of shells/torps despite their small displacements.

Radars indeed have finite duration. I'm on ATC duty and even today , primary surveillance radar are not reliable. Especially since they have a low rotation rate. At 12 -15 rotation a minute, the radar will only update the information per 5 or 3 seconds after analysis. Pre analysis they look like a god damn mess. Radar is dumb, it cannot tell apart objects it detect. And you can ponder how objects moved between 5 to 3 seconds slip to tell what it is. High powered radar is unsustainable for long period. It is especially dangerous to it's own operators and equipment durability.

Most radars will operate on a set basis in a day, they RARELY stay on operational for a whole day and will switch to another one. Many stations today operate 2 out of 3 in any given day to allow rotation and maintenance work. IF you don't and operate full power, it won't last very long.

Second, powerful radar signal disrupt other wave communication. A ship sending out a powerful sweep will also temporarily shit it's own communication and other aircraft comm in close proximity. And a sweep will sometimes fail to detect objects it should depending on the weather conditions. In thunderstorms, they are near useless.

TL;DR : they have a duration. If they went on full power , it won't last more than a few hours or it will screw it's own crews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
704
[SALT]
Member
2,064 posts
10,542 battles
On 4/15/2020 at 2:30 AM, Project45_Opytny said:

I've heard vaguely that the real-life French naval architects did develop a "gimmick" of faster reload (of course still incomparable to the fully-automatic reloading naval guns, like those aboard Des Moines, from the late 1940s) in the 1930s. Though few detailed information about that can be recalled at present. And AFAIK many French tanks in WG's WoT feature "clip-reloading guns" with a similiar operational principle.

 

They have studies using Jean Bart, somewhere in 1960.

its not autoloader, but Automatic Electric Shell and Powder hosing mechanism. on paper it cut the combat reload time from 70s avrg to 45s. but Ship to ship missile is proven more alluring than Gun. as it was never manifested. the Reload Gimmick is mostly WoT tribute of some sort.

 

the other French Gimmick (shared also by Italian)  of speed did have historical basis

501ecf3b3f.png

Geographical location of Italy is basicly long peninsula surounded by Bodies of Water. West lie potential enemy to dominate mediteranian sea, French. while in East there very nearby Austria Hungarian Empire, Turk and pass the Bosphorus lie Soviet/Russia Black sea fleet.

so the Italian Naval command need a modest Fleet with Ship fast enough to reinforce whichever front that need help. so the combined Naval power of whole RM can be regrouped within days if necesary. This makes the Italian Design revolve around concept  that emphasize Speedy, Agile, and Fast.

Where French lies in this ? The French have  agreement with British. British would safeguard French Interest in Atlantic, while French would focus in protecting both Nation interest in the Mediteranian sea. This result in French having direct Rivalries with Italian on Who is the master of Mediterania. With Mediteranian being closed waters and Italian Navy being build to be Fast. there is no way for French to control the Mediteranian without the same focus on Fast Fleet. 

However, what intriguing is the WG approach, The french Speed boost seems to emphasize of - Interception - as the french ship is not normaly being fast. which can be interpreted funnily as French was try to catch up with Italian speed. - which historicly somewhat kinda true,

 

Another French trait was they Have Long range and Excelent HE. this actualy have historical basis. The Battle of Tsuhima play crucial role for French Naval development. The Decisive Long range and reliability of IJN HE shells in dismantling Russian Fleet was showcased in Tsuhima. and by 1910 the French Admirals most notabily Adm Cervais, Fournier and Caillard. emphasize the HE shells with large Bursting Charge (explosive) and very Long range Gunnery with Heavier shells

Before that the French Gun development policy was High velocity gun, as Norman Friedman wrote :

74a6b548b7.png

after 1910, French favor heavier shells and with very long range Gunnery

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3
[PCE]
Member
22 posts
3,866 battles

With regards to SAP shells for the Italians they actually did use them and they used far more then HE shells especially for their battleships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,863
[TLS]
Member
4,251 posts
20,391 battles

None. It is purely for "aesthetic appeal", otherwise all the ships would play similarly.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×