Development Blog - New Ships, Massive Blog

[OldSchoolGaming_Youtube]

Being Swedish im really interested in the Swedish T10 Cruiser "Svea" (apparently the Cruiser version of a "Ragnar".....).

Stealth radar, smoke AND radar combo, 46 knot speed, high Dakka, heals etc. Wonder if it will be for Coal or maybe RB? I really hope the dont cram every interesting ship into Steel.

Edited June 7 by OldSchoolGaming_Youtube

[Itwastuesday]

And here's the devblog. https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/539

I'm not sure we need more dementia battleships. 

I'm fairly sure we don't need more smoke cruisers and stealth radars.

An I'm definitely sure we don't need more submarines. 

[Nevermore135]

The implementation of Pan-American battleships starting at tier VIII is a massive disappointment considering all the historical designs at lower tiers associated with the South American dreadnought race of the early twentieth century. If I was from one of those relevant nations this development would probably feel like a massive middle finger from the devs.

I remember there being quite a bit of disappointment expressed when the US slow BBs were announced as starting at tier VIII because there are some US BB classes only represented by premiums that could have been implemented as well for a full tech tree line, as well as some grumbling about the weirdness of starting the Italian BB line at tier IV, but this is something very different. Those decisions did have some logical justifications even if people weren’t happy with WG’s decisions: Nevada-, Pennsylvania-, and Tennessee- class are represented by premiums, the aforementioned “missing” American BBs would be similar to the already existing same-tier dreadnoughts, and starting a line one tier higher than normal is a pretty minor change all things considered.

When WG has implemented tier VIII branches (with only three ships it’s hard to call this a “line”) in the past they have been within the same type (for example, French large cruisers from heavy cruisers, both American BB branches from the original BB line, etc.). This is a pretty jarring departure from that pattern. I suspect this decision is a combination of the general desire to push a diminishing playerbase into the high tier MM pool combined with the development roadmap/requirements specifying a partial vs. complete line at this point and PA battleships drawing the short straw.

Edited June 7 by Nevermore135

[Verblonde]

16 minutes ago, Nevermore135 said:

The implementation of Pan-American battleships starting at tier VIII is a massive disappointment considering all the historical designs at lower tiers associated with the South American dreadnought race of the early twentieth century.

This. My knowledge isn't great, but I thought there was a lot of interesting stuff to do a full line with? Part of the reason I don't mind some of the wacky high tier things we get, is that a lot of the relevant trees have been historical lower down e.g. recent Commonwealth cruisers.

I assume this latest apparent laziness on WG's part is at least partly because they've run out of products done before the company split in two, and they now don't have the capacity to produce as much interesting new stuff as previously (I guess this is also why most of the new premiums have had deathly dull permaflage options recently as well; I doubt it's WG deliberately trying to make the history buffs happy)...

[OldSchoolGaming_Youtube]

1 hour ago, Itwastuesday said:

And here's the devblog. https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/539

I'm not sure we need more dementia battleships. 

I'm fairly sure we don't need more smoke cruisers and stealth radars.

 

I could add so much more to that list, like subs and CVs in general, stoopid game modes, aircraft on every class and ship in the game. But I given up on all this a long time ago. now days my philosophy is "If you cant beat them Join them".

So instead of playing DDs, that I like to do and do very successfully, and get crapped on by every new gimmick, stoopid game mode or airplane spotting coming into the game, I instead never play DDs and instead play the most Cancer there is like CVs, Subs, OP unbalanced Superships and Premiums, because that's the only way to enjoy this game now days. Its World of Un-balanced Warships.

So, I will probably specc my Svea with Superintendent and consumables duration and RPF so it will be a perfect DD Hunting/killing machine. So, I will speed boost directly at the enemy DD, as soon as he spots me, I will radar him, so he will enjoy trying to do the slow "Gamer turn" right into my Dakka, so he will die and before his teammates react, I will smoke up and start farming BBs. Then rinse and repeat. Totally balanced?  .............. but probably at least "Balanced by playerbase" as usual. 

 

1 hour ago, Itwastuesday said:

An I'm definitely sure we don't need more submarines. 

Hey, its only like a T6 Submarine version of Asashio that can dev strike any same tier BB out of the water, just like Gato at T10, what can go wrong here.....?

 

                                                                            Im definitely getting it btw!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Wolfswetpaws]

 

Quote

Development Blog - New Ships, Massive Blog

  

 

[Admiral_Karasu]

So how's Flamu reacting to this? Positively?

[OldSchoolGaming_Youtube]

12 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

So how's Flamu reacting to this? Positively?

I think hes reacting like most veteran players these days.

 

But of course, with a bit extra spice (even for Clarkson) for his viewers. Hes usually not that wrong tho. T6 BB newbies didn't really need a shotgunning Gato hunting them at T6, but why would I care? I never play T6 BBs, so it sux to be them I guess.

T10 DDs didn't really need a Beefed up Ragnar cruiser with high Dakka stealth radar and smoke to be hunting them on top of all the rest of the BS that they have to deal with, but why would I care? I will probably be the Svea player hunting the DDs. 

Edited June 7 by OldSchoolGaming_Youtube

[Wolfswetpaws]

2 hours ago, Itwastuesday said:

And here's the devblog. https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/539

Thanks for sharing the link.

[Ensign Cthulhu]

1 hour ago, Nevermore135 said:

The implementation of Pan-American battleships starting at tier VIII is a massive disappointment considering all the historical designs at lower tiers associated with the South American dreadnought race of the early twentieth century.

With this I agree.

14 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

So how's Flamu reacting to this? Positively?

Is he even capable of that any more? 😛

I think I said on stream just last weekend that I'd be prepared to give up the Felix Schultz's speed boost and DFAA for hydroacoustic search. Lo and behold, here comes the Georg Hoffmann, which adds in hydro and lets you keep all the rest! Uptiering Felix to T10 doesn't change much since she can see superships already anyway. 

PLEASE let this thing be for coal.

[Kruzenstern]

1 hour ago, Nevermore135 said:

The implementation of Pan-American battleships starting at tier VIII is a massive disappointment considering all the historical designs at lower tiers associated with the South American dreadnought race of the early twentieth century. If I was from one of those relevant nations this development would probably feel like a massive middle finger from the devs.

This so much. Also the silly swedish tier10... They even mention the Tre Kroner in the description, but rather than giving us the historical ship at a reasonable tier (I guess 6-8 could work depending on stats and gimmicks), we get a fantasy contraption at tier10 for all those blathering fools who will throw money at WG for tier10s (As a predominantly PvE player, 10 can kiss my behind mostly). Well, what else to expect, the game is really nothing more than a moneygrab anymore.

Edited June 7 by Kruzenstern

[ArIskandir]

I see them trying but...  

Same old road, same weathered path... More ships, nothing new to experience.

[Jakob Knight]

1 hour ago, OldSchoolGaming_Youtube said:

 

 

Hey, its only like a T6 Submarine version of Asashio that can dev strike any same tier BB out of the water, just like Gato at T10, what can go wrong here.....?

 

                                                   

 

Ummm...no, it isn't.

 

Asashio is a stealthy ( approx.  5.7 k. Conceal) DD with a 20km range on its 8 torpedo tubes.

 

Guo 14 is an unstealthy ( 6.4 km conceal) Sub with only 4 front and 2 aft torpedoes that can't fire beyond 10.5 km and whose torpedoes do next to no damage at 3km or closer, and who can only reload half its tubes at one time.  It has low submerge capacity with about the lowest recharge rate of any Sub.  The only advantage it has is its 31 knt speed when running on the surface, which is where Subs with bad Concealment die.

 

No, this Sub is hardly an Asashio, and I'm not sure I'd want to run it if I had it.

 

 

[MidnightPhoenix07]

3 hours ago, Verblonde said:

This. My knowledge isn't great, but I thought there was a lot of interesting stuff to do a full line with?

High tiers would have to be paper designs or “what if” ships no matter what (which they are in the blog too). Even if there aren’t blueprints that would work, the what if part is still doable since several of the South American countries were looking at purchasing ships from the US/UK/etc before and around WWII anyway. But t3-6 would have easily been real ships and covered the SA dreadnought race - Minas Gereas, Rivadavia, Almirante Latorre (all historical ships) for t3-5, and then Riachuelo at t6 (historical design but cancelled when WWI started).

With Rio de Janeiro being a premium, you’d be stuck needing a paper/what if design for t7 (otherwise you could possibly push Riachuelo up to t7 and put RdJ in at t6, but that wouldn’t work as well imo if you compare them to same tier contemporaries). But a paper t7 would still be justified, or there might even be historical drafts or later design ideas that could be developed to fit in that spot. 

[Itwastuesday]

3 hours ago, OldSchoolGaming_Youtube said:

So instead of playing DDs, that I like to do and do very successfully, and get crapped on by every new gimmick, stoopid game mode or airplane spotting coming into the game, I instead never play DDs and instead play the most Cancer there is like CVs, Subs, OP unbalanced Superships and Premiums, because that's the only way to enjoy this game now days. Its World of Un-balanced Warships.

Yeah, nothing quite like queuing up as Grozovoi or smth and it's assrace, enemy has a bunch of murderous gunboats, gearing wooster unicum division, lolcarrier that decides the only thing to do is to circle you and you only and an underwater menace that curves torps into you by pinging a clueless teammate behind you. 

I could play Svea too, certainly love my Plymouth, but I'm saying the game doesn't need more smoke cruisers. TX is already pretty much only kiting battleships ever visible. What it needs is armored cruisers that don't get oneshot by battleships from every angle.

[Admiral_Karasu]

35 minutes ago, MidnightPhoenix07 said:

High tiers would have to be paper designs or “what if” ships no matter what (which they are in the blog too). Even if there aren’t blueprints that would work, the what if part is still doable since several of the South American countries were looking at purchasing ships from the US/UK/etc before and around WWII anyway. But t3-6 would have easily been real ships and covered the SA dreadnought race - Minas Gereas, Rivadavia, Almirante Latorre (all historical ships) for t3-5, and then Riachuelo at t6 (historical design but cancelled when WWI started).

With Rio de Janeiro being a premium, you’d be stuck needing a paper/what if design for t7 (otherwise you could possibly push Riachuelo up to t7 and put RdJ in at t6, but that wouldn’t work as well imo if you compare them to same tier contemporaries). But a paper t7 would still be justified, or there might even be historical drafts or later design ideas that could be developed to fit in that spot. 

Yes... high tiers would be paper like they are for most nations, since *cough* WG in their infinite *cough* wisdom *cough* *cough* decided to skip pre-dreadnoughts entirely making the tech trees heavily skewed in the direction of WW2 era ships.

[ArIskandir]

4 hours ago, OldSchoolGaming_Youtube said:

Im definitely getting it btw!

I'm not sold, the concealment sucks and there's only 3.5 minutes of dive tank with a very slow reload... timing it right you get time for a quick in-out attack but then it is just a suckier torp DD with very mediocre concealment. On top of that you are crippled against other Subs and DDs...

The concept isn't bad for a Submarine in WoWS (I remember proposing something on these lines back in Dev stage), but at this point it makes little sense when the genie is out of the lamp. Even less sense with the recent minimum range damage nerf, this Sub clearly was design with pre-nerf criteria... it's kinda obsolete even before release. 

[Admiral_Karasu]

3 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

I'm not sold, the concealment sucks and there's only 3.5 minutes of dive tank with a very slow reload... timing it right you get time for a quick in-out attack but then it is just a suckier torp DD with very mediocre concealment. On top of that you are crippled against other Subs and DDs...

The concept isn't bad for a Submarine in WoWS (I remember proposing something on these lines back in Dev stage), but at this point it makes little sense when the genie is out of the lamp. Even less sense with the recent minimum range damage nerf, this Sub clearly was design with pre-nerf criteria... it's kinda obsolete even before release. 

So what could be WG's selling point then?

[ArIskandir]

5 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

So what could be WG's selling point then?

For this Sub? ... to spam deep water torps at 7km range I guess. Maybe pull a close range attack every 5-6 minutes?. 

It indeed looks like a mini-Gato, but the range nerf is hitting her harder imo. Action at mid-tiers happens at closer ranges, being toothless inside 3km is obscene. 

[Jakob Knight]

10 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

So what could be WG's selling point then?

 

There are three selling points to the Guo 14 as I see it currently.

 

It is the only T6 Sub that gets to switch to unguided torpedoes.  It has as surface speed of 31 knots (which is seen at T8 on the USN Sub), and it offers Sub gameplay to those players who have concentrated on the Pan Asian lines.

 

I don't think those are enough for me personally, but other players may decide it is worth it to them.

 

Edit:  also...first T6 Premium Sub.

 

Edited June 7 by Jakob Knight

[Itwastuesday]

53 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

Yes... high tiers would be paper like they are for most nations, since *cough* WG in their infinite *cough* wisdom *cough* *cough* decided to skip pre-dreadnoughts entirely making the tech trees heavily skewed in the direction of WW2 era ships.

Yeah, well skewed toward ships that didn't exist. Era-appropriate TX would be like Yamato, Iowa, Bismark, Richelieu, Littorio, Vanguard (or KGV?)...

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

1 hour ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

Yes... high tiers would be paper like they are for most nations, since *cough* WG in their infinite *cough* wisdom *cough* *cough* decided to skip pre-dreadnoughts entirely making the tech trees heavily skewed in the direction of WW2 era ships.

Infinite foolishness, more like...

But it is what it is.

[00_PureEvil_00]

PanAm battleships... There was just one single battleship design for Brazil armed with 234-mm secondaries, and it had just three (THREE) twin turrets of them. And then WG exagerrated it up to eleven creating first Atlantico, and now this technoheresy. And of course, historical PanAm BBs like Minas Geraes, Rivadavia and Latorre are just a joke to them.

Svea... just what for? Same question about Chinese sub.

Hoffman is also a disappointment — they had many historical variants of Type 1937, Type 1938A and Spahkreuzer, but they decided to inflate poor Type 1936A. "Why, mister Anderson?"

2 hours ago, MidnightPhoenix07 said:

High tiers would have to be paper designs or “what if” ships no matter what (which they are in the blog too). Even if there aren’t blueprints that would work, the what if part is still doable since several of the South American countries were looking at purchasing ships from the US/UK/etc before and around WWII anyway. But t3-6 would have easily been real ships and covered the SA dreadnought race - Minas Gereas, Rivadavia, Almirante Latorre (all historical ships) for t3-5, and then Riachuelo at t6 (historical design but cancelled when WWI started).

With Rio de Janeiro being a premium, you’d be stuck needing a paper/what if design for t7 (otherwise you could possibly push Riachuelo up to t7 and put RdJ in at t6, but that wouldn’t work as well imo if you compare them to same tier contemporaries). But a paper t7 would still be justified, or there might even be historical drafts or later design ideas that could be developed to fit in that spot. 

I thought Geraes at T4 (ten 305-mm guns broadside IMHO are too much for T3), Latoore at T5, Riachuelo at T6, and a Riachuelo preliminary with either ten 15-inch or eight 16-inch guns at T7. Then T8 could be filled with one of Rio de Janeiro preliminaries with ten 406-mm guns (yes, these are real), and T9-10... well, only speculations/fantasies there. 

Rivadavia could be a nice T5 premium (it had better armor and secondaries than both Geraes and Latorre, and better main guns than the Brazilian battleship).

33 minutes ago, Itwastuesday said:

Yeah, well skewed toward ships that didn't exist. Era-appropriate TX would be like Yamato, Iowa, Bismark, Richelieu, Littorio, Vanguard (or KGV?)...

The problem is, among the ships you listed only Iowa could be a worthy opponent for Yamato. All others are just too weak (especially KGV). And not all nations have even historical paper designs that could rival the Japanese kaiju.

I, personally, don't see much problem with fantasy ships... just as long as they are implemented when and where they are really needed, like Hindenburg or Colombo. And unfortunately, the further we go, the more completely unnecessary fake/semi-fake ships WG creates...

5 hours ago, Verblonde said:

I assume this latest apparent laziness on WG's part is at least partly because they've run out of products done before the company split in two, and they now don't have the capacity to produce as much interesting new stuff as previously (I guess this is also why most of the new premiums have had deathly dull permaflage options recently as well; I doubt it's WG deliberately trying to make the history buffs happy)...

I did a little analysis a few months ago. Since the split and by early February 2024, WG had created around half as much ships with more or less original models, and three times more ships which are (almost) complete copypastes of existing ones, compared to Lesta. Also, WG often releases new ships for testing without their models (even when they are more or less copypastes, like Rodney), while Lesta does not seem to have such problem.

My opinion is that after the split, most of WoWS artists remained with Lesta, and WG just does not have enough of them. Hence delays in models making, and hence the flood of copypastes.

[Project45_Opytny]

2 hours ago, Itwastuesday said:

Yeah, well skewed toward ships that didn't exist. Era-appropriate TX would be like Yamato, Iowa, Bismark, Richelieu, Littorio, Vanguard (or KGV?)...

And that simply illlustrates why "era appropriate" is inherently flawed despite being raised once in a while: King George V is no match against Iowa which in turn is at a significant disadvantage regarding "classic" gunnery and protection comparing with Yamato.

With the current "tonnage-speed-firepower comprehensive valuation" have been working fine for tech trees in general, I wonder why do you bring out the "era appropriate" again and again.

 

1 hour ago, 00_PureEvil_00 said:

Hoffman is also a disappointment — they had many historical variants of Type 1937, Type 1938A and Spahkreuzer, but they decided to inflate poor Type 1936A. "Why, mister Anderson?"

G. Hoffmann IS Type 1938A, though more exactly WG's interpretion of the project.

[Admiral_Karasu]

5 minutes ago, Project45_Opytny said:

And that simply illlustrates why "era appropriate" is inherently flawed despite being raised once in a while: King George V is no match against Iowa which in turn is at a significant disadvantage regarding "classic" gunnery and protection comparing with Yamato.

 

Technically speaking, in WOWS two out three of those ships can meet in battle. How's this in any way more appropriate?