Tech Tree Lines players are still waiting for .....

[Aethervox]

A full EU Cruiser tech tree line - I've got a 10 pt Cpt sitting on the T1 Gryff just/still waiting to get to a T5 Cruiser.

[Admiral_Karasu]

34 minutes ago, Aethervox said:

A full EU Cruiser tech tree line - I've got a 10 pt Cpt sitting on the T1 Gryff just/still waiting to get to a T5 Cruiser.

That could be... interesting.

[Nevermore135]

I find it amusing that we have a mostly Swedish DD line that is nominally European, and yet we received a Spanish (rather than European) cruiser line.

I was a bit surprised by WG’s decision to introduce the Dutch cruiser line, but with the release of submarines combined with the historical contributions of the Dutch navy in WWII, I could rationalize the Dutch getting their own “nation” after the plan seemed to be to combine smaller European navies into a single, combined faction (by removing Poland, for example). Not so with Spain, which seems to have been implemented as their own nation with the main goal of soaking up CXP.

Edited February 14 by Nevermore135

[Wulf_Ace]

French CVs

[Wrath_of_Deadguy]

Pan-American DDs would be a good one; there are real ships all the way to T10.

Dutch DDs would also be a good line, needing only a couple paperbotes to pad it out, and it would be unique since the T8 and T9 (and presumably the paper T10) would be torpedoless gunboats ala Friesland and Groningen.

Commonwealth DDs seem like a logical addition, since these could also have a real steel T10- even if the line would just be a copy/paste of existing British DDs.

EU cruisers, sure- there are at least as many real ships suitable for that line as in any of the other recent cruiser lines.

There are still enough USN DDs waiting in the wings to fill a whole second tech line out starting at T2.

There could also be a USN Supercruiser branch, and it would probably be the easiest new line to implement since they already have models for T8-10 (Congress, Alaska, and Puerto Rico simply become... let's say Phillipines, Guam, and Samoa- Guam having been Alaska's sister, and the other two names drawn from the remaining cancelled Alaskas).

German supercruisers also seem to be an obvious choice. Pair the line with a gimmicked-up Deutschland class premium at T7, then pick the line up proper at T8 with a clone of Schill, the T9 would be a clone of Agir, and some WG napkin-doodle as a T10. Honestly, why US and German supercruisers weren't the first two such tech lines, I still can't figure- they're the only two nations that ever built any.

...and we already know that an IJN CV split, a Soviet sub line, and an IJN sub line are in the works. That's at least two more years' worth of content.

 

[Hugh_Ruka]

any DD line for me 🙂

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

I'm waiting for the expansion to 15 tiers and the inclusion of predreadnoughts and armored cruisers.

That's the way to get a hell of a lot more content without having to resort to nonsense paper designs.

Plus, it would lengthen the grind to get to higher tier ships.

It makes so much sense, WG won't do it anytime soon.

Edited February 14 by Daniel_Allan_Clark

[MBT808]

11 hours ago, Wrath_of_Deadguy said:

German supercruisers also seem to be an obvious choice. Pair the line with a gimmicked-up Deutschland class premium at T7, then pick the line up proper at T8 with a clone of Schill, the T9 would be a clone of Agir, and some WG napkin-doodle as a T10. Honestly, why US and German supercruisers weren't the first two such tech lines, I still can't figure- they're the only two nations that ever built any.

Don't need a WG napkin doodle at all. A Panzerschiffe branch ideally would be as follows:

Deustchland(tier VI)
            ↓

P-class(tier VII)     Admiral Scheer(tier VII premium)
            ↓

P/D-class(3x3 283 proposal, A-XY layout was proposed for the P class)(tier VIII) -> P-class(2x2 380mm, yes this is a real thing)(tier VIII)
            ↓

SchlachtKreuzer O(tier IX)
            ↓

O-42(One of the IRL design variants for Schlachtkreuzer O with 4x2 38cm)(tier IX)
            ↓

O-class with 42cm guns or O-42 with 406mm guns(tier ★)

A clone of Agir would not be included as that doesn't fit the historical progression of the Panzerschiffe ships that germany planned. Deustchlands were followed by the D-class, which were then dropped in favour of the Scharnhorst class and P-class. P-class were then also canceled in favor of SchlachtKreuzer O before the surface fleet plans would be scrapped all together. There is literally no reason for fake ships in the sub branch, all the IRL proposals are there.

Edited February 15 by MBT808

[Itwastuesday]

I'd want german CL, though I'm not sure how they wouldn't superannuate the CA line. 

[Unlooky]

1) German CLs

2) German CBs

3) US DD split

4) Japanese Submarines

5) Spanish DDs?

6) Dutch DDs? 

7) Soviet BCs?

 

Some possible lines for WG to add. I think Lesta added Soviet BCs on their game as well already. I don't think any of these lines would be too unreasonable.  

[Itwastuesday]

Oh, british torpedo DD split plz. I want to single launch 15 torps in a conga line

[Asym]

2 hours ago, Itwastuesday said:

I'd want german CL, though I'm not sure how they wouldn't superannuate the CA line. 

I see the real "problem" with German CL's is that they really don't have a existing CL to CLONE....  Yes, they have the Leipzig and the Nurnberg/Markov to start with but, to what end>?  

Now, if they really wanted upper tier German CL's, I wonder if those hulls could be converted to Flak ships;  Fast rapid firing commerce raiders; or, ASW platforms>>>???

A niche ship.

Edited February 15 by Asym

[Itwastuesday]

There's Mainz of course. 

[Nevermore135]

6 hours ago, MBT808 said:

P/D-class(3x3 283 proposal, A-XY layout was proposed for the P class)(tier VIII)

There was a 3x3 proposal for the earlier D-class ships. Raeder in fact pushed for such a design from the get-go, put was overruled by Hitler, who insisted on maintaining the same firepower, similar speed, and only enhanced armor compared to the Deuschland-class. The first two ships were laid down in Feb 1934, but with French building the Dunkerques (which would outclass these ships in pretty much every way) construction was quickly paused and the decision was made to modify the design to incorporate the third turret. Construction never restarted, though, as later that year the decision was made to scrap the class altogether in favor of the Scharnhorsts (laid down in 1935). The P-class design process would begin a few years later, in 1937.

I also doubt we’ll get a German CB line that starts at tier VI, considering how much trouble Graf Spee has caused in certain game modes and the fact that the next lowest tier CB currently is Toulon at tier VII. IMO, we’re more likely to see such a line start with Deutschland at tier VII, featuring, among other things, the 25mm extremity plating we’d expect from a mid-tier German CA/CB and some other QoL improvements. That leaves space for some variant of the D-class at tier VIII, with the P-class likely being skipped over altogether (and already represented by Schill).

 

Edited February 15 by Nevermore135

[pepe_trueno]

17 hours ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

I'm waiting for the expansion to 15 tiers and the inclusion of predreadnoughts and armored cruisers.

That's the way to get a hell of a lot more content without having to resort to nonsense paper designs.

Plus, it would lengthen the grind to get to higher tier ships.

It makes so much sense, WG won't do it anytime soon.

dont think they can expand the tree much past t10 without the introduction of homing missiles and that is going to end horribly wrong

 

The reason why WG does not do pre dreadnoughts and armored cruisers is because for the most part they cant go past t5 and WG has no interest in lower tiers.

that being said would be nice if armored cruisers could get their own line starting at t5 with some real ships San Giorgio 1940 refit (italy), Rurik (Russia), iwate 1945 refit (japan), SMS Fürst Bismarck (german), HMS Defence 1907(british) and from there on do a "what if the armored cruiser concept was not scraped" line using paper ships and refits.

 

germany could go SMS Fürst Bismarck (t5)--> blutcher (t6)-->Deutschland class (t7) 

Edited February 15 by pepe_trueno

[Aethervox]

17 hours ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

and the inclusion of predreadnoughts and armored cruisers.

I'm all for this. The problem is WoWS decided on circa 1900 as the start date for T2 (T1s are immaterial) instead of starting ships circa 1890.

If you research it, this is where all these earlier ships they could have begun with are (historically). So many early motorized warships WoWS decided to forgo.

17 hours ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

It makes so much sense, WG won't do it anytime soon.

Agreed, WG seems incapable of doing anything with any 'sense'. For them, it's all about scamming the 'cents'.

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

40 minutes ago, pepe_trueno said:

dont think they can expand the tree much past t10 without the introduction of homing missiles and that is going to end horribly wrong

 

The reason why WG does not do pre dreadnoughts and armored cruisers is because for the most part they cant go past t5 and WG has no interest in lower tiers.

that being said would be nice if armored cruisers could get their own line starting at t5 with some real ships San Giorgio 1940 refit (italy), Rurik (Russia), iwate 1945 refit (japan), SMS Fürst Bismarck (german), HMS Defence 1907(british) and from there on do a "what if the armored cruiser concept was not scraped" line using paper ships and refits.

 

germany could go SMS Fürst Bismarck (t5)--> blutcher (t6)-->Deutschland class (t7) 

I don't think I explained it well.

My idea would be to add the new tiers BETWEEN tiers 1 and 4 or 5.

Basically expand the scope of the game to take the earlier timeframe into account...as this MASSIVELY increases the number of ships and content you can add to the game.

It also lengthens the grind to tier 10 and creates whole new sinks for resources.

It's literally a slam dunk for WG, which is why they won't do it.

[pepe_trueno]

5 hours ago, Asym said:

I see the real "problem" with German CL's is that they really don't have a existing CL to CLONE....  Yes, they have the Leipzig and the Nurnberg/Markov to start with but, to what end>?  

Now, if they really wanted upper tier German CL's, I wonder if those hulls could be converted to Flak ships;  Fast rapid firing commerce raiders; or, ASW platforms>>>???

A niche ship.

pick scharnhorst and give it the Wyoming AA training ship treatment: make the 105mm the main guns (283mm and 150mm replaced with more 105mm) and remove  armor to make it lighter. there german super CL 😆

 

 

Edited February 15 by pepe_trueno

[pepe_trueno]

8 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

I don't think I explained it well.

My idea would be to add the new tiers BETWEEN tiers 1 and 4 or 5.

Basically expand the scope of the game to take the earlier timeframe into account...as this MASSIVELY increases the number of ships and content you can add to the game.

It also lengthens the grind to tier 10 and creates whole new sinks for resources.

It's literally a slam dunk for WG, which is why they won't do it.

WG has no interest in lower tiers and has make it clear they don't want seasoned players there which is why they removed any incentive to be there so anything below t5 is a waste of time. also note that increasing the number of tiers will spread the playerbase distribution increasing queue times.

best thing they could do is give them the jagger treatment and introduce them as new lines.

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

6 minutes ago, pepe_trueno said:

WG has no interest in lower tiers and has make it clear they don't want seasoned players there which is why they removed any incentive to be there so anything below t5 is a waste of time. also note that increasing the number of tiers will spread the playerbase distribution increasing queue times.

best thing they could do is give them the jagger treatment and introduce them as new lines.

All of those things are issues WG could fix if they wanted to do so.

They are not valid reasons not to expand the tiers. The benefits to WG far outweigh the 'benefits' of remaining stuck inside a prison of their own making.

[kriegerfaust]

Italian carriers, European Battleships, Pan-American Battleships

[pepe_trueno]

21 hours ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

All of those things are issues WG could fix if they wanted to do so.

They are not valid reasons not to expand the tiers. The benefits to WG far outweigh the 'benefits' of remaining stuck inside a prison of their own making.

WG is a business and like any business their objective are profits and there are no profits in lower tiers because the system is designed to push players to the ends tier.

 For your idea to be profitable than WG would have to change their monetization scheme to work across all tiers which include:

*allowing all tiers to participate in events, dockyards and missions as well as adding modifiers so these events are doable in lower tiers since is not the same to get 2100 base exp in a t2 than a t10 let alone farming 10 million damage.

*creating a prem ship cost the same regardless if its a t3 or a t8 yet the t8 can be sold for much more. For low tiers to be profitable WG would need to find a way so they can sell low tier prems at the same price without the need to make them grosly overpowered. May be low tier prems could get a higher commander exp multiplier.

*Prem time has little to offer to low tiers since they don't lose money nor their require extensive grind to elite a ship

 

dont get me wrong i really like low tiers since battles are more dynamic and there is far less camping / sniping.  but as said before under the current system players have no reason to stay in the lower tiers and even if they stayed there WG cant make as much money as they would from higher tiers.

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

18 minutes ago, pepe_trueno said:

WG is a business and like any business their objective are profits and there are no profits in lower tiers because the system is designed to push players to the ends tier.

Only because WG set up to have high tiers be the profit making area...that's a choice WG made...they could choose a different model.

18 minutes ago, pepe_trueno said:

 For your idea to be profitable than WG would have to change their monetization scheme to work across all tiers which include:

*allowing all tiers to participate in events, dockyards and missions as well as adding modifiers so these events are doable in lower tiers since is not the same to get 2100 base exp in a t2 than a t10 let alone farming 10 million damage.

*creating a prem ship cost the same regardless if its a t3 or a t8 yet the t8 can be sold for much more. For low tiers to be profitable WG would need to find a way so they can sell low tier prems at the same price without the need to make them grosly overpowered. May be low tier prems could get a higher commander exp multiplier.

*Prem time has little to offer to low tiers since they don't lose money nor their require extensive grind to elite a ship

Yes, but my idea is no different than the current setup.

You can still say tiers 1-5 are low tiers and not part of events...you just have more tiers with more content that ARE part of events.

There is nothing in my proposal that means all tiers have to be part of events.

You wouldn't want to make modifiers for low tiers, the goal is to make money. If new players want to accelerate progress towards getting shiny things...they can pay real money.

There is no reason now for tier 10 ships to cost more money than other tiers...save to align with how WG likes to lie about rewards.

WG could sell a particularly historical tier 5 ship for the cost of a tier 10 and people would buy it. WG is currently trapped by their own assessment of value and can't fathom that other thought processes exist.

Premium time always has value...even for low tiers as it accelerates progress to high tiers (credits are the bottleneck for progress and PT really helps with that early on).

18 minutes ago, pepe_trueno said:

dont get me wrong i really like low tiers since battles are more dynamic and there is far less camping / sniping.  but as said before under the current system players have no reason to stay in the lower tiers and even if they stayed there WG cant make as much money as they would from higher tiers.

Players only rush to high tiers because WG sets up the system to reward that. It doesn't have to be that way.

WG could make lots of money from lower tiers if they wanted to...they just havent figured out that the lie they tell the customer does not have to be true for themselves. They've forgotten that the 'high tiers is better' advertising is a lie.

Edited February 16 by Daniel_Allan_Clark

[Yedwy]

Lines?

Pan-euro cruisers (split to cl-ca at t2 so we can have some 190-ish mm down below) and bbs with KuK predreads or at least mikasa style premium option for it

Pan-am dds and bbs even if its gonna be a lot of copy pasta in there

Spanish dds

Duch subs (duh I know but I dont hate subs on priciple quite the contrary, what I despise is the way they implemented them in wows) and dds

US supercrusers (a more balanced Alaska would be nice or otherwise an Alaska 1:1 clone at T10 would be ok I guess)

KM supercruiser progression from armored cruiser at T2 up to T10 if they dont have enough projects for all tiers it could go even tiers only (graf spee likes)

IJN subs (same as for duch) and supercruisers

[Taylor3006]

I have that special Euro Captain (forget his name) still sitting at ten points, hardly ever used, waiting for the Pan European Cruisers to drop. When I figure out which one to assign him to, will bump him right up to 21 points immediately since I have 4 or 5 million ECXP. I have been avoiding using him to keep it cheap to assign him to his ship. I guess by the time they introduce another pennant flying special captain, I will have enough ECXP to do the same thing to them.