So the radar FCS wouldn’t be quicker at all? Hopefully they make spawns farther and change the way the FCS stuff works so the accuracy difference can actually be felt
R2Y2s were paper planes and got removed, Maus, Coelian, 105mm Tiger II, Panther II…
You can argue the R2Y2 never left the paper stage, fair.
But you cannot argue the same for the German tanks. Sure, Maus is a balance nightmare, but what about the rest? At least they were not quite literally impossible to be built and some actually got partially built or could’ve easily been built. Just re-add them with their “paper” performance ig, right?
If not, add the actual impossible project, get us the P1000 Ratte ¯_(ツ)_/¯
1 Like
Wasn’t the 105 tiger impossible to make with how big the gun was?
Its making the grind so insane for the Iowa, when there’s one of these things on the opposite side, it pretty much nukes our entire team.
I play in a squad of 3 (were all running an aced Tennessee with crew 100), even after focusing the thing we’re slowly picked off one by one followed by our entire team.
One round we had 3 Iowa’s on our team and they all got destroyed by the same SS, much balanced…
2 Likes
What are you on about?
I’m not “arguing” anything, let alone anything about German tanks - why tf bring that up??
I am representing what Gaijin’s stated criteria is AFAIK
That’s not true!! lol
“Paper performance” should not be a thing if the vehicle we’re talking about couldn’t even leave the paper stage or possibly be finished to begin with.
You mentioned “real world” considerations having no impact on the game, which is true, otherwise the famously bad German transmission would make their heavy tanks unplayable. But a bad transmission in a tank here or unreliable engine in a plane there are far different from a ship that was literally impossible to be built in the Soviet Union. That’s why I mentioned the P1000 Ratte, literally impossible. Maybe IRL they could start with its tracks or cannons or whatever, but impossible at the end of the day, so it’s obviously not in the game, why would the Soviet ship be?
It would apply for its cannons which broke themselves in less than 100 shots, I guess we could ignore that. But we can’t ignore ALL the rest of the ship which was literally impossible to be built with Soviet industry and technological capabilities in that field.
I brought the German tanks and R2Y2s as a parallel. All removed because they “never left paper stage” or “didn’t finish completion”. Same for the Sovetsky Soyuz. Sure, lots of other ships are unfinished projects or whatever, but it’s not like they were actually IMPOSSIBLE. Some ships didn’t get finished due to costs related to war, or the shipyard it was being built in being captured etc etc. The Soyuz, once again, was IMPOSSIBLE, having that fantasy thing in this game absolutely dunking on everything else, even THE Yamato, is actually crazy.
1 Like
I suppose you meant Boulannikoff?
I think you have to prove that it was impossible all sources that has been given indicate that ship can be built but in slower pace than expected.
1 Like
I’ll be really honest with you, I won’t chase all the sources multiple people have posted in multiple other posts about this ship because I’ve been talking about it for a good while. But you can find it. There absolutely were limitations, beginning with experience and available scientific personnel, moving forward to industrial limitations and ending at actual technological limitations where it was supposed to be built.
Yeah, I guess the “slower pace” would probably be decades
2 Likes
Airplanes and ground vehicles has different rules compared to vessels when comes to add them to the game and this is obvious. This whole discussion regarding the Project 23 balance was active during the announcement of its implementation.
While I won’t bother proposal vehicles gets added regardless if they were built or not, at least being realistic and placed in a fair battle rating for both parties, this hot topic should not bring problems to the game but Gaijin aways take the shortest route.
The 105 mm cannon on the current Tiger II (H) turret design is impossible to be any practical, realistically it couldn’t have any negative degree of depression, the minimal value should’ve ~2°+ to fit the gun and the optical rangefinder in the same place, same is applied to the Panther II with the 88 mm cannon.
2 Likes
I have never seen that anywhere.
The reports are that the Soviets could not produce CEMENTED armour of the required thickness, so went for face hardened.
All the following is my thoughts from various sources read over the years… much of it is from TABLE OF METALLURGICAL PROPERTIES OF NAVAL ARMOR AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS - especially the descriptions of different types of armour in about the last 1/3rd of the page
Face hardened armour is still a single thickness unless specified otherwise somewhere - but instead of changing the chemical makeup of the hardened faces it just hardens them by heating and quenching - much as you can do to steel with a blow torch and a tub of water.
Both cemented and face hardened are a single thickness or metal.
Cemented armour is made by exposing 1 side of the steel plate to carbon at high heat- originally this would be coal dust but I believe carbon-rich gas replaced that - eg Acetylene. This would take place for several days, and the carbon would be absorbed into the structure of the iron crystalline lattice, increasing strength and hardness for some depth. The depth could be controlled by how long the exposure was, at what heat and the amount of carbon in the gas.
One of the big “unseen” advantages is that you can heat and cool the whole plate at teh same speed throughout the thickness - avoiding internal stresses that occur in face hardening.
Face hardened steel, on the other hand, is hardened by heating the plate to a particular temperature and then quickly quenching it on one side - this “freezes” the harder structure of the steel on that side while the rest of the plate cools more slowly and reverts to more ductile state.
However this face hardening introduces stresses into the plate - the front that is quenched and the middle and rear that are not obviously cool at different speeds, and so also contract at different speeds, and this (AFAIK) is a major shortcoming of thick face hardened plate - the internal stresses make it more likely to fail when hit, and this is the main reason that it is considered significantly inferior to cemented plate.
1 Like
Impossible? I don’t think so, considering the presence of Soviet Navy were resumed in coastal defense and assaults using light ships in seas and the political and economy situation for a new vessel and the features it promissed, a decade long time to build a bluewater vessel is somewhat realistic.
1 Like
That’s honestly what I find ideal. I’m OK with unfinished or paper projects being added for the sake of having content or desperate balance UNLESS, that is… as long as they’re realistic or balanced, which I think the Soyuz is neither
3 Likes
And yet that ship was being built in the USSR, and if a cannon barrel only lasts 100 rounds that doesn’t stop it from existing - it just makes it really expensive to actually operate.
You seem to be confused - saying real world considerations have to be applied to Soviet ships, but not to German tanks??
Please quote the message I directly said that and if you do I’ll explain the direct parallel between those I thought of
Things like Project 23 being added give me more stronger opinion regarding the presence of anti-ship missiles and a ‘evolution’ in the coastal vessels branch. Yet I don’t think naval battles as a whole is ready for this kind of weapon.
Naval has been met with such a chaotic treatment from Gaijin, I don’t even know anymore
1 Like
I think it was 2 or 3 years later than expected not decades.
they would have never been able to produce in time for it to be actually usefull.