Kronshtadt
1 Like
Those guns don’t exist at all?
Nope
Huh
Ppl still deny Russian bias
I know, I’m using an extremely exaggerated example to point out the flaws in Gaijins “rules” for naval.
Like I said, under Gaijin current rules Space battleship Yamato is a legitimate suggestion, on the bright side you can write your own story about any ship you like and as long as it canonically uses the original hull its historically accurate and can be added to the game!
Huh, never mind on the A-150 suggestion, its already a thing - Ship number 798 - Super Yamato(A-150 battleship) - Suggestions / Naval - War Thunder — official forum
Guess its only a Montana suggestion to build then.
1 Like
No, I haven’t, would be funny, but torpedos are basically worthless at the moment. AP bombs (if it had them) for the Buc s1 would probably be the most valuable addition at the moment
Optimus Primowa?
Why not? Write it up as an “off topic” post and quote it as a source, about as reliable as half the stuff they are using now.
particularly air dropped ones, ship launched ones take half the game to get to their target, but at least you can set them to hit under the armour belt, air drops are just a waste of a plane. I was hoping the hydro shock would make them somewhat useful again but nope.
Probably should ask for Tallboy and Grand Slam instead
Ironically. Whenever im in a ship like Belfast that doesnt have torpedos. I get at least 1 oppotunity every single match to use them. Like I had a Italian BB pop out of no where within 2km. Perfect free kill. If i Had torpedos.
But in something like London with Torpedos, nope, never fire them.
Its really really annoying.
But yeah, Tallboy would be a good weapon to add now for anti-naval. Though whether or not a Lancaster can even make it to drop it these days is a question that would need to be answered still.
1 Like
Murphy’s a D**k isn’t he?
given how many naval players just park somewhere to shell its just a matter of adjusting the bomber spawn altitude and distance… and praying a Bravy isn’t on the enemy team and actually paying attention.
actually, given that air isn’t anywhere near as oppressively in naval as in ground I wonder how spawning a full flight of 4 planes that cloned you movements and load outs would work for it… its not like anybody sent planes at ships one at a time…
1 Like
Yeah, I have thought about something like that. Or even just having waves of AI aircraft spawn in randomly or when a player spawns in just to draw some fire, would be good. Would add some little extra value to SAM ships in the future.
Maybe heavy bombers could do with a 1-2km increase in spawn alt
1 Like
The Montana-class battleships have detailed designs, and the main gun, Mk. 7, and the secondary gun, Mk. 16, are real. But if they did not exist as weapons specifically for the Montana class battleships, does that mean they cannot be added to the WT?
https://catalog.archives.gov/id/301095586
https://catalog.archives.gov/id/301095588
That is correct, to put it simply:
Ship was not laid down ≠ can’t be suggested
Ship did not have any part made specifically for it = can’t be suggested
When I refer to unique part it is in reference to parts specific to say in this case a Montana class, so a spare 16 inch Mark 7 gun isn’t enough to make suggesting Montana valid, it would require instead that said 16 inch Mark 7 gun to be made specifically with the intention of being fitted to a Montana class.
If you really want to understand how it works, go ask Leroyonly as they are the senior suggestion mod I learned a bit more about the suggestion rules in regards to incomplete vehicles, that is where you will find definitive answers on how it works.
2 Likes
Instead of arguing about whether Gaijin should add project ships, rather than change next update’s name to “Make Red Navy Great Again”. One PR.23 can beat any other country’s top tier battleships. Gajin enjoying see all players suffered by soviet’s vehicles.
And we just like back to 2021, one Pari with 1928 wheelchair ammo can sink a whole team’s battleships. In next updates, which team have more PR.23, that team will win.
Aye, I’d wager that the 5"/54, being that it was specifically designed and built for Montana, would be enough to suggest it. Plus, there are also the auxiliary diesel generators that were built.
Regarding the 16"/50 Mark 7s, Ryan Szimanski, the curator for Battleship New Jersey, claims that NJ’s current 16"/50s are nine of the twelve specifically built for Montana rather than spares. He’s been collecting sources on other items built for Montana that also got passed around.
Well, there is Amagi, as I’ve mentioned before. According to the devs, Amagi is based on the 1919 Preliminary design that was never authorized for construction or laid down. For whatever reason, what we have in-game is not representative of the Amagi class as laid down, and instead is a preliminary design with ahistorical weaponry (which has been bug reported before and denied because the devs reportedly intentionally modeled it on the 1919 Prelim designs).
5 Likes
Is it true that the Mk.7 owned by the battleship New Jersey is part of a gun barrel manufactured for the Montana class?
I would like to see proof if possible.
NJ was not the only use of the barrels as well, 2 of them went on to make the HARP gun program succeed, having two of the barrels fused together it to make it one of longest naval gun ever constructed. The HARP gun at the highwater test range holds the record for the longest naval gun ever constructed, however, that gun also used earlier mark II 16"/50 barrels.
we could just give uss iowa her refit with tomahawks
1 Like