Shipbucket

I think the limit is fine. There's no need to further divide ships into escort destroyers and such. It is a multiplayer game after all. It doesn't have to be so complicated.

_________________

I agree with Tristan. The only advantage of such deviding is satisfaction of naval nerds

_________________
«A sea is not a barrier, a sea is a road, and those who try to use the sea as an instrument of isolation soon realize their foe has already put the sea into his own service.». - Alfred Thayer Mahan.

The constant arguments by all the various autists on the WoWS forum and Reddit completely drained me of any attempt to join the debate over the Alaska being added. I'm not sure why the weight of the shell, muzzle velocity of the guns, turning radius, speed, etc can't all just be punched in and the game won't more-or-less accurately sim it, but I know WG does a bit of its own balancing (naturally to make all the made-up Soviet ships more powerful), so it's whatever.

I would actually way rather see the Royal Navy in-game before the devs move on to the more esoteric ships for each nation.

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)

WG balance is somewhat stupid. As an example, Omaha-class shooting range is bigger then South Carolina's one.

_________________
«A sea is not a barrier, a sea is a road, and those who try to use the sea as an instrument of isolation soon realize their foe has already put the sea into his own service.». - Alfred Thayer Mahan.

As much as I dislike the Russian bias, I have to hand it to the Russians... they're the only ones making games these days with any attention to historical detail. Pretty much all of my favorite games these days seem to come from relatively-obscure Russian studios.

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)

I hear so many people talking about this Russian bias on all sorts of other Wargaming games! But is it really true? I used to think America had the best of everything.

_________________

Historically speaking America and Britain had the most advanced warships, yes.

If you compare the tiers in WoWS you'll see that the Soviets reach their "1945" cruisers and DDs much quicker than anyone else though. This is primarily because most of the Soviet navy in WoWS was invented to fill the tiers.

The Russian bias is obvious in the way the ships are balanced against each other. I think that much should be obvious to anyone who plays WG games.

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)

I do remember one of the early Russian destroyers have a huge amount of torpedoes...and those cruisers look really powerful compared to their counterparts...wait did you say they were invented??? As in they didn't even exist on paper!?

_________________

Maybe invented is a bit of an exageration, but five out of nine ships making up the russian cruiser line are just paper ships.

_________________
My Worklist
Sources and documentations are the most welcome.

-Koko Kyouwakoku (Republic of Koko)
-Koko's carrier-based aircrafts of WWII
-Koko Kaiun Yuso Kaisha - KoKaYu Line (Koko AU spinoff)
-Koko - Civil Aviation

Ships that never sailed because they were never built. Whereas nearly every ship in the US and IJN was real (with a few exceptions, obviously). The RN will be the same way.

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)