What kind of ships do you think should be playable in light of War thunder's small(ish) ship/ boat plan? (I encourage you to read the description of each class below before you vote in the poll so you get an idea of what they are capable of)  

201 members have voted

  1. 1. Heavy/ Light Cruisers

    • Heavy Cruisers
      22
    • Light Cruisers
      46
    • Both
      139
    • None
      18
  2. 2. Destroyers

    • Yes
      193
    • No
      8
  3. 3. Frigates

    • Yes
      189
    • No
      12
  4. 4. Corvettes

    • Yes
      184
    • No
      17
  5. 5. If you chose no to all of these ships, do you only want boats?

    • Yes
      7
    • I did not say no to including ships.
      194
  6. 6. Though it is very unlikely to be added, do you want things like battleships and battlecruisers to be added to war thunder as playable warships?

    • Battleships will work in the naval meta.
      13
    • Battlecruisers (less armored, but faster, similarly armed) will work in the naval meta.
      18
    • Both will work in the naval meta.
      102
    • Neither will work in the naval meta.
      48
  7. 7. Monitors

    • Yes
      140
    • No
      28
  8. 8. Auxiliary Cruisers

    • Yes
      135
    • No
      32
  9. 9. Though they are the least likely to be playable, how do you think Aircraft Carriers can work?

    • They should remain as they are.
      39
    • They should remain as A.I. but available as a form of artillery. (similar to ground forces, but with planes)
      53
    • They should be playable.
      38
  10. 10. Though they are unlikely to be in war thunder as A.I. or playable warships, what capacity do you think Submarines can be in?

    • Submarines can be A.I. in the naval meta.
      30
    • Submarines can be playable in the naval meta.
      60
    • Submarines cannot work in the naval meta.
      40


23 minutes ago, USA_man_2014 said:

Me, personally want Battleships in game because, 1. I've been on one, 2. I have a family friend who served on one, 3. They're just cool!

Same! Though, there is already a post focused on Battleships. 

 

Edited by *Harbinger2167
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

     So I have an idea of how to allow at least some player control of large ships like battleships and aircraft carriers without breaking the game or causing matches to be any longer while keeping these ships ai controlled as gaijin intends. You know in arcade battles if you get enough kills you can control an aircraft for a short time? What if in ship battles (perhaps in all modes) if you achieve enough towards a goal like ships sunken or score earned you could control a single gun turret of an ai controlled battleship for a short duration. This could also function on a cooldown to give all players a chance to use these ships in some way without breaking the game.

 

     Aircraft carriers could provide a mechanic to replace the artillery strike mechanic used in tank battles. A small player controlled ship could either achieve a goal or have a cooldown (like in tank rb) to be able to order a small group of ai controlled aircraft to their grid square to make a run on enemy ships or enemy aircraft. In the ship modifications the player could research an anti-ship order to sink ships or a fighter order to shoot down the enemies ai aircraft. This could add a greater sense of atmosphere to the game. If the ai are problematic (player aircraft could try to farm them and disrupt gameplay) then the order could function like the orders in air rb that give teammates additional rp and lions for destroying enemy ships in a small area or shooting down enemy planes.  

 

     I think this method of large ship implementation could work very well. It would leave the ships ai controlled to prevent game breaking issues, keep player ship combat focused on small ship gameplay, and allow for some player influence over the large ai ships on their team. If you would like for gaijin to see this post and possibly influence their methods of large ship implementation please share this post with others.

Edited by Sekainoshihaisha
Note
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Sekainoshihaisha said:

     So I have an idea of how to allow at least some player control of large ships like battleships and aircraft carriers without breaking the game or causing matches to be any longer while keeping these ships ai controlled as gaijin intends. You know in arcade battles if you get enough kills you can control an aircraft for a short time? What if in ship battles (perhaps in all modes) if you achieve enough towards a goal like ships sunken or score earned you could control a single gun turret of an ai controlled battleship for a short duration. This could also function on a cooldown to give all players a chance to use these ships in some way without breaking the game.

 

     Aircraft carriers could provide a mechanic to replace the artillery strike mechanic used in tank battles. A small player controlled ship could either achieve a goal or have a cooldown (like in tank rb) to be able to order a small group of ai controlled aircraft to their grid square to make a run on enemy ships or enemy aircraft. In the ship modifications the player could research an anti-ship order to sink ships or a fighter order to shoot down the enemies ai aircraft. This could add a greater sense of atmosphere to the game. If the ai are problematic (player aircraft could try to farm them and disrupt gameplay) then the order could function like the orders in air rb that give teammates additional rp and lions for destroying enemy ships in a small area or shooting down enemy planes.  

 

     I think this method of large ship implementation could work very well. It would leave the ships ai controlled to prevent game breaking issues, keep player ship combat focused on small ship gameplay, and allow for some player influence over the large ai ships on their team. If you would like for gaijin to see this post and possibly influence their methods of large ship implementation please share this post with others.

Aircraft carriers could be an interesting mechanic as a sort of artillery. I might add Aircraft Carriers and Submarines to the list or even the poll, but again, that might stray people away from the original focus on this post which is generally about smaller warship classes and their potential in war thunder multiplayer as possibly playable vehicles (but in an effort to stay relevant, I will likely add them to the list tomorrow, just as AI vehicle classes though).

Credited in Aircraft Carriers! Thanks for the input o7! :good:

Edited by *Harbinger2167
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just my very personal opinion:

 

Battleships, Battlecruisers and Heavy Cruisers
I can't imagine to have very large ships (Battleships, Battlecruisers and the largest of heavy cruisers) implemented in War Thunder. Short game length prevents them from having the real "feel" of a realistic battleship that have the potential to last for several 100 hits and would likely give every battle the Hood vs. Bismarck feeling! Further: In combined battles developers want some interaction between ships and tanks, battleships and the like have the potential to shell the entire tank map from far away which....I guess is only fun one or two times. At the moment we don't have any planes that are "Plane mode only" and I don't think that Gajin is changing that for ships-Congratulations, you just invested 50+ hours in researching Mutsu! To bad it's naval only, you can not play it in combined battles!

 

 

Cruisers: 

Guess that light Cruisers should be the end of the line when it comes to combined battles...Later in a pure naval mode maybe we can think again about bigger stuff...

 

Monitors:
Monitors are again difficult! They were (are) river defence vessels and are as such relatively slow, this limits their effectiveness in an open water engagement. Also they have high caliber guns making them dangerous to tanks! Then again they don't have the large number of guns of a battleship...In the end I voted yes (Mostly because I want the Parnaiba as a premium vessel^^)

 

Frigattes and Corvettes:
Light, small stronger than a patroul boat, weaker than a deestroyer? Should work. On the other hand, their main objective was to lay mines and I think to remeber that there wont be mines in War Thunder...

 

Auxillary Cruisers:
Some fit in well, so I think we should have them. Others are mainly trading or cargo vessels with a few hidden machine guns....They might be interesting for a new mechanic. If Ai controlles cargo vessels, transporters, merchants and the likes are additional targets, than they shouldn't be marked as player controlled and start to shot their guns at small ships that confuse them for easy targets!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As expected the vote is pretty much the majority going "add all the things".

 

Lets be honest here. Gaijin does have a point aobut realistic naval combat. Most players dont have the patience for it. Hell. Flying across the English channel in some of the recent events was too much for a lot of people.

 

Then you factor in that the game is meant ot have groudn air and naval forces interactign with eachother. Anythign biger than a destroyer isnt exactly fair against tanks or even individual aircraft.

 

I think destroyers are fine for waht Gaijin has in mind. they are decently fast and manuverable + not that much larger from things they will probably include such as corvettes gunboats and river monitors. + every nation has a nice selection within that size range.

 

That and peopel are severly underestimatign what a "boat" can be armed with. 1 particular type of soviet River Monitor had a total of 6 130mm guns as its main armament. Thats the firepower of 6 SU100Ys. That an array AA guns. Monitors would pretty mcuh be the "Battleships" on this scale.

Edited by MrMakWASP
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it would be cool to have landing craft for ground/island capturing operations

and destroyers/monitors bombard the beaches and artillery units

 

  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Mercedes4321 said:

Yeah monitors are pretty cool, like the HMS Lord Clive:

The_Surrender_of_the_German_High_Seas_Fl

It has 2 12 inch guns in a turret at the front, 2 6 inch guns on wither side of the funnel and a massive 18 inch gun stuck facing over the starboard side (it could traverse 20 degrees to either side but that was it).

 

Somehow, I suspect that coastal monitors and light cruisers will be the largest ships available to players in Warthunder Naval, with Destroyers being the heaviest ships available initially.

medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Nomad_Gaming said:

 

Somehow, I suspect that coastal monitors and light cruisers will be the largest ships available to players in Warthunder Naval, with Destroyers being the heaviest ships available initially.

probably, unless they add escort carriers(which is unlikely)

 

also are destroyer escorts just about corvettes?

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On August 14, 2016 at 11:17 AM, SeraphsWrath said:

I support having the Lord Clive at Tier II with a BR of 5.0 with it's 18 inch guns.

No point in being tier 2 with the restrictions gone... 

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/15/2016 at 3:09 AM, CritticalError said:

Just my very personal opinion:

 

Battleships, Battlecruisers and Heavy Cruisers
I can't imagine to have very large ships (Battleships, Battlecruisers and the largest of heavy cruisers) implemented in War Thunder. Short game length prevents them from having the real "feel" of a realistic battleship that have the potential to last for several 100 hits and would likely give every battle the Hood vs. Bismarck feeling! Further: In combined battles developers want some interaction between ships and tanks, battleships and the like have the potential to shell the entire tank map from far away which....I guess is only fun one or two times. At the moment we don't have any planes that are "Plane mode only" and I don't think that Gajin is changing that for ships-Congratulations, you just invested 50+ hours in researching Mutsu! To bad it's naval only, you can not play it in combined battles!

 

 

Cruisers: 

Guess that light Cruisers should be the end of the line when it comes to combined battles...Later in a pure naval mode maybe we can think again about bigger stuff...

 

Monitors:
Monitors are again difficult! They were (are) river defence vessels and are as such relatively slow, this limits their effectiveness in an open water engagement. Also they have high caliber guns making them dangerous to tanks! Then again they don't have the large number of guns of a battleship...In the end I voted yes (Mostly because I want the Parnaiba as a premium vessel^^)

 

Frigattes and Corvettes:
Light, small stronger than a patroul boat, weaker than a deestroyer? Should work. On the other hand, their main objective was to lay mines and I think to remeber that there wont be mines in War Thunder...

 

Auxillary Cruisers:
Some fit in well, so I think we should have them. Others are mainly trading or cargo vessels with a few hidden machine guns....They might be interesting for a new mechanic. If Ai controlles cargo vessels, transporters, merchants and the likes are additional targets, than they shouldn't be marked as player controlled and start to shot their guns at small ships that confuse them for easy targets!

Fantastic input :good:, well thought out, and with consideration to other forces in the case of mixed battles.

  • I agree that Heavy and Light Cruisers would be difficult to have as playable and balanced warships due to the nature of their armament and armor (it would be a rough fight unless you yourself were a Heavy/ Light Cruiser), if ever added, they would have to be at higher tiers and it would probably only be Light Cruisers like you said.
  • While Monitors did in fact have fantastic bombardment capabilities, they required cables and a large amount of crew load up one of those guns (in other words, pretty long reload). I also agree they were pretty slow and intended to be on rivers, so maybe they would stick at low to mid tier ranges if ever added, where if they miss, other ships with a faster fire rate have a feast, but again, this would be a bit rough to balance because Monitors are a bit on the obscure end of the spectrum.
  • Frigates and Corvettes did tend to focus on laying mines, it wasn't the only thing they did, some were exclusively Anti-Air, some used torpedoes, some were designed to fight ships of similar or smaller sizes, and some frigates were larger than Destroyers, just with overall smaller guns.
  • Interesting mechanic for Auxiliary Cruisers! A sort of stealth ship with mediocre armament. Auxiliary Cruisers are a super broad classification, because it's pretty much just warships or re-purposed cargo ships designed to attack trade routes, etc., so it has a lot of potential! 

 

Thanks for the input and feel free to talk about (almost) anything else! ;)

Credited in Heavy Cruisers (shifted to unlikely) o7! :good:

Edited by *Harbinger2167
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, MrMakWASP said:

As expected the vote is pretty much the majority going "add all the things".

 

Lets be honest here. Gaijin does have a point aobut realistic naval combat. Most players dont have the patience for it. Hell. Flying across the English channel in some of the recent events was too much for a lot of people.

 

Then you factor in that the game is meant ot have groudn air and naval forces interactign with eachother. Anythign biger than a destroyer isnt exactly fair against tanks or even individual aircraft.

 

I think destroyers are fine for waht Gaijin has in mind. they are decently fast and manuverable + not that much larger from things they will probably include such as corvettes gunboats and river monitors. + every nation has a nice selection within that size range.

 

That and peopel are severly underestimatign what a "boat" can be armed with. 1 particular type of soviet River Monitor had a total of 6 130mm guns as its main armament. Thats the firepower of 6 SU100Ys. That an array AA guns. Monitors would pretty mcuh be the "Battleships" on this scale.

Yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes. Thank you for the input! :good:

  • I agree that a good few people are going for the "add all the things" vote, but I appreciate the people voting no to some of these things. The large ship vote is perhaps the most divisive vote on the poll which I like.
  • I also would love Destroyers to be added (at higher tiers of course) because they are relatively short range, surprisingly maneuverable, and relatively pretty fast. Though again, I wonder how they would match up against other smaller ships if added.
  • I agree that the power of smaller war boats shouldnt be underestimated, they are surprisingly capable. Will add a picture of a cool war boat, just need to find one...

Thanks for the input and feel free to talk about (almost) anything else! ;)

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Mercedes4321 said:

And if you want something really unique (although not maybe particularly useful) you can include Rocket boats to your list:

LCT_Launching_Rockets.jpg

That is known as a LCT (R) and it had between 972 and 1,044 RP-3 rocket projectors strapped to a deck added on top of an LCT Mk III. Now as you might imagine this is a long range vessel, it was incapable of hitting targets close to it and was instead meant to blanket large areas in large quantities of rockets at a distance.

 

6 hours ago, Benjamin1112 said:

it would be cool to have landing craft for ground/island capturing operations

and destroyers/monitors bombard the beaches and artillery units

 

Something like this? :p: There were a few larger landing craft that did stuff like this, kudos to Mercedes4321 for pointing them out!

4 hours ago, Benjamin1112 said:

Good work!

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, CritticalError said:

Monitors:
Monitors are again difficult! They were (are) river defence vessels and are as such relatively slow, this limits their effectiveness in an open water engagement. Also they have high caliber guns making them dangerous to tanks! Then again they don't have the large number of guns of a battleship...In the end I voted yes (Mostly because I want the Parnaiba as a premium vessel^^)

Monitors, at least those designed by the British, were actually offensive vessels, designed to bombard enemy shore batteries from long-enough range to be immune to return fire. They participated in D-Day, the invasions of Africa and Italy, and many others. They mostly filled the Naval Gunfire Support role, assisting other FACs, Corvettes, Frigates, and DDs and large ships in combat, particularly with land defenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, SeraphsWrath said:

Monitors, at least those designed by the British, were actually offensive vessels, designed to bombard enemy shore batteries from long-enough range to be immune to return fire. They participated in D-Day, the invasions of Africa and Italy, and many others. They mostly filled the Naval Gunfire Support role, assisting other FACs, Corvettes, Frigates, and DDs and large ships in combat, particularly with land defenses.

right

monitors are great for bombarding land forces

but they have a long reload time, making them vulnerable to attacks

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/16/2016 at 10:52 AM, Benjamin1112 said:

right

monitors are great for bombarding land forces

but they have a long reload time, making them vulnerable to attacks

SHOTGUN TIME!!

In all seriousness, they would probably need to hang back a little and focus on engaging land forces in Combined Forces.

Edited by SeraphsWrath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, SeraphsWrath said:

SHOTGUN TIME!!

In all seriousness, they would probably need to hang back a little and focus on engaging land forces in Combined Forces.

:018: Just returned from a trip, time for me to get back into gear. This post is almost complete with it's first phase (the general gathering of information). We are now somewhat moving on to the next phase, which is refining, spelling/ grammar check, some fact checking and better formatting. It's gonna take awhile.

 

  • Totally agree that (if added) Monitors will need to be at a decent range to bombard ground targets or larger, slower ships to be more effective. Though, nothings stopping it from acting like a KV-2 or SU-100Y and derping anything that it gets the first shot on.
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I noticed that you have no description for how submarines can work, so let me help you with that. Submarines are meant to be the ultimate stealth vessels, they hide in the dark depths and hunt prey of opportunity. This usually amounted to isolated war ships and merchant vessels. They work on the idea of ambush tactics and stealthily launching torpedoes. Besides their torpedoes most have a deck gun, although in most cases they are relatively small and rarely exceeded 100mm (there were some exceptions to this, such as the British M-Class submarines which had a 305mm gun that could be fired while at periscope depth). Some, especially Italian submarines, carried mines to lay mine grids while no one was watching. Their main disadvantage is their incredibly low speed, even on the surface very few of them exceeded 20 knots and they got even slower while submerged. Add to this that if they are discovered they are easily knocked by even small PT boats due to their limited capacity to fight back. The whole point is to remain undetected while going after targets that have little to no hope of dodging your attacks as you strike at them form the shadows.

Edited by Mercedes4321
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Mercedes4321 said:

So I noticed that you have no description for how submarines can work, so let me help you with that. Submarines are meant to be the ultimate stealth vessels, they hide in the dark depths and hunt prey of opportunity. This usually amounted to isolated war ships and merchant vessels. They work on the idea of ambush tactics and stealthily launching torpedoes. Besides their torpedoes most have a deck gun, although in most cases they are relatively small and rarely exceeded 100mm (there were some exceptions to this, such as the British M-Class submarines which had a 305mm gun that could be fired while at periscope depth). Some, especially Italian submarines, carried mines to lay mine grids while no one was watching. Their main disadvantage is their incredibly low speed, even on the surface very few of them exceeded 20 knots and they got even slower while submerged. Add to this that if they are discovered they are easily knocked by even small PT boats due to their limited capacity to fight back. The whole point is to remain undetected while going after targets that have little to no hope of dodging your attacks as you strike at them form the shadows.

Fantastic, all lists have completed their first stage! I will now be moving to the refinement stage, which will take up to a week. :008:

 

Added and credited in Submarines o7! Thanks for the input! :good:

Edited by *Harbinger2167
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I originally put down light cruisers being the top of the line, but now I think about it, that still can cause some problems.  With Gaijin's intent being on combined operations, I think some light cruisers will fit in with WT's meta fine, like the Omaha, Emden and Kuma (Edit:  maybe even the Kuma could cause problems, as it can bring all it's guns to bear, unlike the Omaha and Emden.  Perhaps the Tenryu would be a better choice).  Some maps may have to be extended a bit to accommodate them, but I don't think they would run into the problems with distance, time and firepower that comes into play with larger ships.  

 

But then, you have the later light cruisers, which have betwen 9 and 15 6 inc/15cm guns firing at 8 rpm (4-5 for British Mk. XXIII) that could just plaster an area with enough HE to make life hell for the ground forces, so now I'm not so sure.  Destroyers definitely, but now I think they'd need to be rather selective with light cruisers, lest they upset the meta.

 

Edit:  Scratch my original edit, The Omaha and Emden (I originally got my Emdens mixed up, I based my decision on the SMS Emden) can bring a similar number of similar calibre guns to bare, and I don't thing they'd cause that much of a problem.  Still, the Tenryu would make a good addition.

Edited by MILESPARVUS
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, MILESPARVUS said:

I originally put down light cruisers being the top of the line, but now I think about it, that still can cause some problems.  With Gaijin's intent being on combined operations, I think some light cruisers will fit in with WT's meta fine, like the Omaha, Emden and Kuma.  Some maps may have to be extended a bit to accommodate them, but I don't think they would run into the problems with distance, time and firepower that comes into play with larger ships.  

 

But then, you have the later light cruisers, which have betwen 9 and 15 6 inc/15cm guns firing at 8 rpm (4-5 for British Mk. XXIII) that could just plaster an area with enough HE to make life hell for the ground forces, so now I'm not so sure.  Destroyers definitely, but now I think they'd need to be rather selective with light cruisers, lest they upset the meta.

I completely agree, some Light Cruisers can be balanced, others can completely glass what they fire at. It starts to reach the fine line between balanced or overpowered. As you said, if ever added, Gaijin would really have to pick and choose which Light Cruisers would be competitive to other warships without pushing the boundaries.

 

Thanks for the input! Changed and credited in Light Cruisers (shifted to unlikely) o7! :good:

Edited by *Harbinger2167
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎15‎.‎8‎.‎2016 at 1:51 PM, MrMakWASP said:

That and peopel are severly underestimatign what a "boat" can be armed with. 1 particular type of soviet River Monitor had a total of 6 130mm guns as its main armament. Thats the firepower of 6 SU100Ys. That an array AA guns. Monitors would pretty mcuh be the "Battleships" on this scale.

 

But very very slow battleships. The Khasan in particular is listed with only 15knots top speed, while the 130mm guns have a maximum firing range of 25km. The very combination Gaijin says is one reason to not include capital ships - if they add monitors, they better add capital ships too.

medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tizianenel said:

 

But very very slow battleships. The Khasan in particular is listed with only 15knots top speed, while the 130mm guns have a maximum firing range of 25km. The very combination Gaijin says is one reason to not include capital ships - if they add monitors, they better add capital ships too.

Fantastic point ;). Shifting Monitors to "unlikely to be playable", and when I say that, I know all of these ship classes (other than Boats) are 'unlikely to be playable', it's just that classes given this addition to their title are relatively less likely to be added as playable naval classes in the future than the rest.

 

Constructive criticism is a fantastic way to chip away rough edges and find what can work in anything!

 

Thanks for the input! Changed and credited in Monitors o7! :good: 

 

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.