World of Warships- Just What The Hell Is Going On With These New Ships??

28 pemikiran pada “World of Warships- Just What The Hell Is Going On With These New Ships??”

1. A couple of thoughts on this one. First, your example of West Virginia 41 and 44 doesn't track, because West Virginia was so heavily rebuilt that the modeling for the two versions is completely different from the ground up, although Wargaming did have an advantage in that most of the work for West Virginia 44 was already done via California, as the only difference between California and West Virginia 44 is the main battery turrets. Ironically, the same will be true if they ever give us Tennessee in her pre-refit form at tier 6, as she would be almost identical to West Virginia 41, with the only differences being the main guns and a slight difference in the equipment modeled on the tower atop the foremast (and to be fair, lot of people don't realize there was a slight difference in the top of the foremast).

   As far as a shortage of models, at tiers 8 and up that is absolutely true. The major capital ship omission at tier 8 would be the lack of representaion of the Kido Butai, as only half can really be considered as represented right now (If you consider Shokaku and Zuikaku to have been similar enough not to warrant a separate model). that said, Akagi, Hiryu, and Soryu have all been modeled for the game in the past, and Hiryu will come back whenever the support Japanese Carriers join. I am somewhat surprised that Akagi and Soryu haven't been announced as premiums.

   Balas

2. good content

   Balas

3. I feel that this criticism circles around the same tornado of player feedback that we see time and time again when it even looks like it's about WG and their future ship plans. You've got the people who hate WG using paper designs and want real ships. You've got people who hate when WG takes ships separate from the tech tree and gives them gimmicks to help differentiate them from the tech tree (because then it's all about the "gimmick"). And then here where WG is introducing some historical ships that people have wanted but then the copy-paste criticism crops up – which at times also includes the gimmick criticism.

   Balas

4. WG is testing the waters (pun intended)
   They want to see what they can get away with, minimum effort/cost for maximum profit.

   Copy/paste ships are definitely a major profit margin.

   They have so many ships in game as is, making copy/paste ships are minimum effort with maximum profit.

   World of Tanks are going Cold War era so I wouldn't be surprised that WG is just putting minimum effort with WoWs copy/paste ships to release a new War Ship game with more modern ships like they're doing with PCW.

   Balas

5. I just the Nelson again… Shame I didn't got her before she got banned

   Balas

6. WG is all about money now , they pitched it the first few years. Sold it. And it SOLD! There was indeed a market for it. Then the human being took over. Greed.

   Balas

7. Because it’s cost elective for WG of course. Why pay a development team that can deliver another Yukon? When we can just take a well known named vessel, copy it out it in game for an exuberant amount of money and at the smallest investment of funds possible. Big return small investment

   Balas

8. can you release the 2.0 mod in 2024 , sealord

   Balas

9. Good video. Longtime Legends player here. No disagreement, just one nitpick.

   Regarding Commonwealth cruisers, let's keep in mind that British hulls and training is what all Commonwealth navies were using exclusively up until at least the 1950s. Agreed, historical accuracy has never been a major priority for WG, but not a lot of wriggle room there without getting into REALLY weird-@$$ hypotheticals. Of course, WG have done the latter before, but I've no idea how successful these have been.

   Balas

10. I think WG should take more time when they release new tech lines, like what they did for some lines, making you play the new ships. Unlocking ships with missions felt a lot more interesting than a BP grind. Especially if like the mission to get the T6 requires playing the T5. Doing stuff to make mid tiers fun again with game modes (like when they did t8 only convoy).

    For money they can just sell premium versions of tech tree ships, people still buy that and it doesn't break the game.

    Balas

11. I had suggested WG make a Korean War thru Vietnam War Era battle mode, they would have a huge new list of historical ships they could build. Very good perspective video SL !! Then there are PT boats !!

    Balas

12. i mean this exact thing happened to wot

    Balas

13. I want my Bayern bull A back as the Baden 1918

    Balas

14. game is getting old! all there is to it.
    now if they get new maps and modes… but that doesn't get players paying money for it! yet would bring players back into the game

    Balas

15. I'm all for the copy pasta to get more historic ships in the game. The resources not utilized to create new ship models can be turned over to making new maps and game modes, win win really. Though I'll never understand why we STILL don't have USS Johnston, w/ E.E. Evans as a captain. Wargaming still manages a swing and a miss on what should be an easy out of the park homer on that one.

    Balas

16. Hello everyone, is it normal that out of 10 battles I lose 9 in tier 10?

    Balas

17. Instead of new ships. I would love to see new operations, new modes. and a general re-balance of some of the older tech lines (Zao, and Hindy first)

    Balas

18. this might be a hot take, but I think wargaming should move on. Not move on as completely scrap the game or start over, but move forward, past the end of WW2 with "modern" tech trees that play in a whole different match maker. you could even call it a true tier 11 but it should never see those already existing T10s. I guess this is really just my pure interest in modern ships as opposed to older ships that is speaking, but I think it'd be great if properly balanced.

    Balas

19. I can think of quite a few real war ships from WW1 and 2 that are not in the game that they could add in, more importantly NEW maps and game modes are needed.

    Balas

20. When you cut the design team off in Russia what else can you expect

    Balas

21. I second more maps and game modes is what's needed plenty of ships to play for now work on more maps and game modes !

    Balas

22. Subs that can stay down all game

    Balas

23. Submarine carrier with Russian squadrons, satsuma guns, German secondaries, deep water and regular torps 15km 70knots
    British HE American AP, surface speed of 38 knots, russian bb armour, American AA.

    Balas

24. Oops, thought I was subscribed. I agree with the theme of your video. I was also looking for this replay because I was the enemy Kagero… hey, I get my minute of background YT fame lol. I thought the replay might come online because you were smashing it. gg!

    Balas

25. History demands the Rodney though

    Balas

26. 5 fletchers and yet NONE OF THEM ARE THE JOHNSTON!!!!

    Balas

27. A simple explanation is there was only so many ships designed due cost and resources during the intended period of the game. WoT has suffered in the same vein where they have simply run out o real or historical ships so must come up with new gimmicks.

    Balas

28. There are many nations that should be added to the game not only from Europe, but from other parts of the globe even if some of their ships might be second hand or straight orders from other nations that are already in the game. Quite sad about the italian DD line tho keeping în mind that they had a lot of DD classes to choose from IRL. And I also hate the "could have been" justification from tier 8 and above for some lines.

    Balas