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)   180 members have voted

  1. 1. Heavy/ Light Cruisers

    • Heavy Cruisers
      18
    • Light Cruisers
      41
    • Both
      125
    • None
      15
  2. 2. Destroyers

    • Yes
      172
    • No
      8
  3. 3. Frigates

    • Yes
      168
    • No
      12
  4. 4. Corvettes

    • Yes
      163
    • 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.
      173
  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.
      12
    • Battlecruisers (less armored, but faster, similarly armed) will work in the naval meta.
      16
    • Both will work in the naval meta.
      92
    • Neither will work in the naval meta.
      40
  7. 7. Monitors

    • Yes
      125
    • No
      22
  8. 8. Auxiliary Cruisers

    • Yes
      120
    • No
      26
  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.
      37
    • They should remain as A.I. but available as a form of artillery. (similar to ground forces, but with planes)
      43
    • They should be playable.
      29
  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.
      27
    • Submarines can be playable in the naval meta.
      50
    • Submarines cannot work in the naval meta.
      32

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

106 posts in this topic

9 hours ago, *Harbinger2167 said:

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:

Well there is one final possible class of ship that existed, the Sloop-of-War. This were a classification that specifically the British used, though you could apply it to a few other ships from other nations if you apply it broadly. The Sloop-of-War as it was designated in WWI and WWII were essentially ships that were too large to be classified as corvettes but didn't meet the requirements of frigates. They had better and more armament than your average corvettes and also had better AA armament than your average corvettes. Sloops tended to be faster than corvettes as well. Sloops should play like larger and much better corvettes (especially in the AA department) for the most part, as that was pretty much what they were designed to do.

 

An example of this class is the HMS Black Swan:

HMS_Black_Swan_1945_IWM_FL_2274.jpg

Edited by Mercedes4321
0

Share this post


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

Well there is one final possible class of ship that existed, the Sloop-of-War. This were a classification that specifically the British used, though you could apply it to a few other ships from other nations if you apply it broadly. The Sloop-of-War as it was designated in WWI and WWII were essentially ships that were too large to be classified as corvettes but didn't meet the requirements of frigates. They had better and more armament than your average corvettes and also had better AA armament than your average corvettes but didn't quite reach the levels found on your average frigate. They are an intermediate class and play like a mix of both of them.

 

An example of this class is the HMS Black Swan:

HMS_Black_Swan_1945_IWM_FL_2274.jpg

Sloop of War eh? Cool name, though they might not stand out enough to be their own class on the list, but i'll look into how many ships may have fallen into this classification tomorrow, it's 4:15 A.M. over here and i'ma bout to pass out. See ya in 5-9 hours. :p:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, *Harbinger2167 said:

Sloop of War eh? Cool name, though they might not stand out enough to be their own class on the list, but i'll look into how many ships may have fallen into this classification tomorrow, it's 4:15 A.M. over here and i'ma bout to pass out. See ya in 5-9 hours. :p:

You won't find a lot of ships under this class, and all of the ones you do find will be from the British as they were the ones who used this designation. The Sloop-of-War are more of a sub-class of corvette than anything else to be honest, they were designed to fill the corvette role but be bigger, faster and much stronger.

Edited by Mercedes4321
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 One ship type is missing from list  Destroyer Escorts they would fit game perfectly =)

0

Share this post


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

 One ship type is missing from list  Destroyer Escorts they would fit game perfectly =)

Corvettes usually were destroyer escorts. In fact Destroyer Escorts as a class was only used when designating American ships, most other countries labelled them as corvettes.

Edited by Mercedes4321
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, But I would still want John C. Butler- Class ship for yanks =)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really holding out for some of these smaller ship classifications to appear in the CBT...as much as I love the look of the smaller gunboats I feel like Destroyers and Frigates, Corvettes, Etc. Would make the game all the more exciting! 

Of course, we'll never know if they never appear in the CBT...

I imagine one of the biggest problems Gaijin's developers are facing for creating an in-game model for one of these larger ships is the crew that they hold. When you compare it to the existing vehicles in the game, the largest Aircraft crew (if I remember right) is 10 (B-17), and it's the same for Tanks (T-35). 

Compare that to a Flower-Class corvette for example, with a crew complement of 85, and it may explain why Gaijin are reluctant to add larger ships. 

 

That being said, I really do hope that the community makes the most out of the opportunity that Gaijin has given us to guide their hand in the implementation of naval forces with feedback from the CBT to have these larger ships implemented! 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ChaosII said:

I'm really holding out for some of these smaller ship classifications to appear in the CBT...as much as I love the look of the smaller gunboats I feel like Destroyers and Frigates, Corvettes, Etc. Would make the game all the more exciting! 

Of course, we'll never know if they never appear in the CBT...

I imagine one of the biggest problems Gaijin's developers are facing for creating an in-game model for one of these larger ships is the crew that they hold. When you compare it to the existing vehicles in the game, the largest Aircraft crew (if I remember right) is 10 (B-17), and it's the same for Tanks (T-35). 

Compare that to a Flower-Class corvette for example, with a crew complement of 85, and it may explain why Gaijin are reluctant to add larger ships. 

 

That being said, I really do hope that the community makes the most out of the opportunity that Gaijin has given us to guide their hand in the implementation of naval forces with feedback from the CBT to have these larger ships implemented! 

 

There are some PT/River boats with 50-60 crew members.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mercedes4321 said:

There are some PT/River boats with 50-60 crew members.

And the monitors could have destroyer-sized compliments (because they were destroyer-sized, I know, but...).

4 hours ago, Mercedes4321 said:

Corvettes usually were destroyer escorts. In fact Destroyer Escorts as a class was only used when designating American ships, most other countries labelled them as corvettes.

I think that Destroyer Escorts were actually Frigates, but I get what you're saying.

 

"The Royal Navy and Commonwealth forces identified such warships as frigates, and that classification was widely accepted when the United States redesignated destroyer escorts as frigates (FF) in 1975."

 

The Japanese called their version "Kaibōkan," but they filled the same roles.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mercedes4321 said:

There are some PT/River boats with 50-60 crew members.

 

Fair enough, but the point I'm getting at is that the smallest ships on this list have 80+ crew members, Frigates like the HMS Loch Lomond have over 100 crew, and the Japanese Akizuki-class destroyers have roughly 300 crew...

I'm just a bit concerned that the developers could find placing that many individual crew members in a ship of that size time-consuming and challenging. 

Of course, I'd rather they had no issue doing so, or at least found an alternate solution that would allow us to have some of the ship types from this list!

Edited by ChaosII
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 here is the list for the ranks that I think should be with smaller ships

 

Rank I

Philadelphia 81-Foot PT boat                           

Huckins 72-Foot Design PT boat

Higgins 81-Foot Design PT boat

 

Rank II                                           

Evarts Class DE

Rudderow Class DE

Buckley Class DE

Edsall Class DE

 

Rank III

Caldwell Class DD

Wickes Class DD

Clemson Class DD

Farragut Class DD

 

Rank IV

Porter Class DD

Somers Class DD

Gleaves Class DD

Fletcher Class DD

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Benjamin1112 said:

 here is the list for the ranks that I think should be with smaller ships

 

Rank I

Philadelphia 81-Foot PT boat                           

Huckins 72-Foot Design PT boat

Higgins 81-Foot Design PT boat

 

Rank II                                           

Evarts Class DE

Rudderow Class DE

Buckley Class DE

Edsall Class DE

 

Rank III

Caldwell Class DD

Wickes Class DD

Clemson Class DD

Farragut Class DD

 

Rank IV

Porter Class DD

Somers Class DD

Gleaves Class DD

Fletcher Class DD

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The size difference between PT Boats and DDs is quite large. I mean the PT Boats are all less than 100 feet long but the Fletcher Class is nearly 400 feet long. That and they play much differently.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what?

 

Size matters not

if PT boats wield plenty of firepower with torpedos its fine against 400ft destroyers

if you saw the WT trailer, you will see the firepower of a PT boat against BBs, DDs etc. etc.

 

th[8].jpg

Edited by Benjamin1112
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Benjamin1112 said:

So what?

 

Size matters not

if PT boats wield plenty of firepower with torpedos its fine against 400ft destroyers

if you saw the WT trailer, you will see the firepower of a PT boat against a BBs, DDs etc. etc.

 

th[8].jpg

Well besides the fact that in some instances size does matter, such as ramming. That and that trailer is one of the most unrealistic things I have ever seen come from this game. Any PT Boat trying what happened in the trailer would have been shot to kingdom come several kilometers out by the secondaries, which all seemed to magically miss in the trailer even as you watched them clearly fire dozens of shots at the PT Boats. In reality under normal conditions PT Boats and similar vessels couldn't really do much against warships, they didn't have anywhere near enough durability to get close enough to fire their torpedoes. They only stood a chance when the situation was stacked heavily in their favour, such as a night battle where they achieved complete surprise (aka extremely rare conditions) and even then it was often a long shot as under such conditions they usually missed and lost their opportunity. They performed best against merchant/cargo vessels and other fast patrol boats.

Edited by Mercedes4321
1

Share this post


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

Well besides the fact that in some instances size does matter, such as ramming. That and that trailer is one of the most unrealistic things I have ever seen come from this game. Any PT Boat trying what happened in the trailer would have been shot to kingdom come several kilometers out by the secondaries, which all seemed to magically miss in the trailer even as you watched them clearly fire dozens of shots at the PT Boats. In reality under normal conditions PT Boats and similar vessels couldn't really do much against warships, they didn't have anywhere near enough durability to get close enough to fire their torpedoes. They only stood a chance when the situation was stacked heavily in their favour, such as a night battle where they achieved complete surprise (aka extremely rare conditions) and even then it was often a long shot as under such conditions they usually missed and lost their opportunity. They performed best against merchant/cargo vessels and other fast patrol boats.

 

But what is the % if there is a successful ramming?

th5O0F1OBN.jpg

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry about not being active lately, i've been preparing for college which starts next week and it's getting super hectic.

 

Though i've been absent for more than a few days, i've been watching the ongoings of gamescom and the response from people to the gameplay and ships that were shown. From what i've gathered and seen, so far, many people argue that naval battles appears to be "tier 1 tanks on water", high fire rate, no armor.

 

It is far too early to judge naval forces, so don't take what I say too seriously, but it kind of scares me how little variation there is so far on the boats we've seen. Most of these boats have little to no armor, and have lots of high fire rate weapons. This is why I made this post, Battleships probably won't be playable in War Thunder but that doesn't mean they are the only ship classes in and around World War 2, I hope that other ship classes at least up to destroyers will be made playable so that we aren't just playing a bunch of ZSU-57's on water with torpedoes and depth charges. There needs to be variation on boats and ships due to the nature of fighting on water, you will be fighting on a level plane. These are just my personal concerns on the involvement of ships and again, it's too early to take anything I say seriously, I just want to address some of the things i've missed while I was gone.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/18/2016 at 0:33 PM, Keijo_Kalmakoura said:

 One ship type is missing from list  Destroyer Escorts they would fit game perfectly =)

 

On 8/18/2016 at 4:59 PM, SeraphsWrath said:

I think that Destroyer Escorts were actually Frigates, but I get what you're saying.

 

"The Royal Navy and Commonwealth forces identified such warships as frigates, and that classification was widely accepted when the United States redesignated destroyer escorts as frigates (FF) in 1975."

 

Placed under Frigates o7! :good:

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/24/2016 at 5:01 AM, *Harbinger2167 said:

It is far too early to judge naval forces, so don't take what I say too seriously, but it kind of scares me how little variation there is so far on the boats we've seen. Most of these boats have little to no armor, and have lots of high fire rate weapons... I hope that other ship classes at least up to destroyers will be made playable so that we aren't just playing a bunch of ZSU-57's on water with torpedoes and depth charges. There needs to be variation on boats and ships due to the nature of fighting on water, you will be fighting on a level plane.

Well, there is good news for this in the addition of the Pt-810, which has the first player-controlled direct/indirect fire weapon in all of War Thunder in the form of an 81mm mortar. I actually like this, as long as they don't artificially limit the elevation angle of the mortar, because it means that there is a new option for killing campers (always a good thing), and you no longer have to rely on the inaccuracy of artillery if, say, you're in combined battles, and you're a Panther D, and there's a hull-down Su-152 out there with his gun already loaded, instead of risking yourself, you can report his position to your squad-mate, Billy Joe, and he can blast the area with his mortar. So, there's also more options for teamwork.

1

Share this post


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

Well, there is good news for this in the addition of the Pt-810, which has the first player-controlled direct/indirect fire weapon in all of War Thunder in the form of an 81mm mortar. I actually like this, as long as they don't artificially limit the elevation angle of the mortar, because it means that there is a new option for killing campers (always a good thing), and you no longer have to rely on the inaccuracy of artillery if, say, you're in combined battles, and you're a Panther D, and there's a hull-down Su-152 out there with his gun already loaded, instead of risking yourself, you can report his position to your squad-mate, Billy Joe, and he can blast the area with his mortar. So, there's also more options for teamwork.

Yea, just went on a bit of a tired late night tangent in the aftermath of Gamescom, I know it's silly and all because they haven't shown much of anything, and i'm pretty sure everything they have (shown) so far is tier 1 if i'm not mistaken (sorry if i'm wrong). Billy Joe's 81mm mortar is a good example of the different weapon systems that are possible in boats even at (I think) low tier.

 

They shall rue the day they messed with Billy Joe.

Edited by *Harbinger2167
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15.09.2016 at 4:25 AM, SeraphsWrath said:

Well, there is good news for this in the addition of the Pt-810, which has the first player-controlled direct/indirect fire weapon in all of War Thunder in the form of an 81mm mortar. I actually like this, as long as they don't artificially limit the elevation angle of the mortar, because it means that there is a new option for killing campers (always a good thing), and you no longer have to rely on the inaccuracy of artillery if, say, you're in combined battles, and you're a Panther D, and there's a hull-down Su-152 out there with his gun already loaded, instead of risking yourself, you can report his position to your squad-mate, Billy Joe, and he can blast the area with his mortar. So, there's also more options for teamwork.

 

No ground+boats mode though. (10:14)

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Estorm732 said:

 

No ground+boats mode though. (10:14)

 

Welp, goodbye hopes... goodbye dreams... been nice knowing you...

 

On a serious note, thanks for bringing this to my attention. :good: Here's the quote for those who want to know if Boats/ Ships will be fighting player controlled tanks: "The answer is... maybe. As some kind of a special event, but not as a regular thing."

 

Realistically, this brings up a lot of questions now... because Boats/ Ships are announced to not be intended to regularly attack player-controlled ground units, this (reasonably) means there really is no need holding back on bringing in Warships that are up to Destroyer class, or even some Cruiser class Warships. As you don't have to worry about being demolished in a tank by a ship that's miles away, it makes sense that they won't regularly combat each other for balance purposes. But this begs the question... will World War mode not be regularly playable when it is finally released?

 

Now it's all on Gaijin whether or not they want to announce any Warships (read the list for the potential classes) as again, i'm pretty sure all that they've shown us so far is tier 1 Boats (correct me if i'm wrong).

 

 

Edited by *Harbinger2167
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/16/2016 at 6:53 PM, *Harbinger2167 said:

Now it's all on Gaijin whether or not they want to announce any Warships (read the list for the potential classes) as again, i'm pretty sure all that they've shown us so far is tier 1 Boats (correct me if i'm wrong).

Aside from the Pt-810, which has been quoted as "taking a relatively-high [whatever that means] position in the US tech tree," I think you're correct.

 

Now, aside from what "relatively high" means (I mean, the Tiger is "relatively high," and that's only tier 3), I guess that helps.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/19/2016 at 8:47 AM, SeraphsWrath said:

Aside from the Pt-810, which has been quoted as "taking a relatively-high [whatever that means] position in the US tech tree," I think you're correct.

 

Now, aside from what "relatively high" means (I mean, the Tiger is "relatively high," and that's only tier 3), I guess that helps.

Yea, still extremely vague on the BR and Rank for the Naval craft they've shown so far in these early stages. It's understandable, but it stinks because we still don't really know what we can expect to be able to play in NF. (other than boats of course)

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/3/2016 at 0:52 PM, KillerAce4 said:

If you are still looking for an image for the BOAT category at the bottom of the original post, google "ww2 armed fishing trawler" or "naval trawler."  It gives a number of fishing trawlers that were converted to military use.

Thanks KillerAce4, the boat image will be replaced by the HMT Lancer (naval trawler). :good:

Sorry for the 9 days it took me to respond :016: I kind of derped out for a bit because of college.

Added and credited in: Boats o7! :good:

Edited by *Harbinger2167
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.