Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Joseph Templar

Problem With Historically Inaccurate Ship

10 posts in this topic

I like to play this game but many of the ship in this game are completely Incorrect, missing some of their weapon, wrong tiers configurations, wrong class and finally wrong weapon configurations.

Many players dont care because they just play the game and waste their money to buy strong ships and be the best. But for me, I play not only for fun and to be on top but also feel the history of ships! Being able to use all their weapon. For instace DD have guns, torpedo and Depth charge. Some destroyers are equipped with hedgehog or squid. Some of the CL, well actually almost all of them had torpedoes. Some even had depth charge. Not forget the CA who's also had torpedoes. And incredibly few BB also had torpedoes! Not convince? Find information about Tirpitz, sister of the Bismarck. Unlike Bismarck, Tirpitz is slightly bigger and had torpedoes. 

Also the problem with ship in this game are in wrong tiers. For instance, Admiral Hipper is higher on CA tiers than Prinz Eugen. Boy.. Everyone knows Prinz Eugen is more advance that Hipper and also more bigger than Hipper. Wow Dev.. Concrats.. Applause to them. 

Now for class of ships. I dont what they were thinking. But i think they just want to simplified things. But i dont like it. Hood, the Great Britain ship, biggest ship in the world before Bismarck. Is a BB? No of course not! Actually she was a Battlecruiser. BC Class. But for now i wouldnt blame them for doing that because in every nation fleet, they may have less or no BC at all. 

And lastly, the incorrect weapon displacement. I meant come on! Whats with the two powerful turret? Yes maybe no one complaint because it gives them huge advantage to sink small and probably huge ships. Yes i admit it but what if that ship that has only two turrets but in reality it was more than two? For example the pensacola, two turrets. WRONG! IT WAS FOUR! Different barrels for two turrets. Two turrets were have two barrel while two other turret has three barrels. I not only pointing on one ship. There are other ship probably also have wrong  number of turret displament.

if try to say to balance the game. sorry but i dont see any balance. Why? Easy, level 1 DD had absolutely no chance of winning nor survive in gb. Not to mention the first CA tiers. Ho had only 48% chance of survive. While in reality or even historically, they all had chance. I am paying costumer too. I pay not only to purchase ship and others. I pay to see changes.. If the developer still create ships not properly, that means they may hear but absolutely DONT CARE. What they care is only MONEY. Applause..

Edited by Joseph Templar
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One more complaint: Gamelin is the name of French CL in NF1, Maurice Gamelin is also a French General,  but Gamlin has been the pcl for Soviet for a whole year in NFM....

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HMS Rodney (Nelson class BB) torpedoed Bismark - it carried the 24.5" torpedoes, the biggest in RN inventory.

As for the Hood being a battlecruiser you are correct, but in game every battleship is technically a battlecruiser until armoured up.

The Hipper/Prinz Eugen is a small example (they were sister ships with minor differences) but there are other examples as well: Provence, Izmail and Fuso were WWI ships that (in game) are more powerful than WWII ships.

If you are looking for historical inaccuracies please check the speeds as well.

Bottom line is: This is a simple game for fast, fun online battles. Names and approximate figures of real ships or ship projects are used but all are modified to fit approximately their class and level.

Enjoy the game. I'm looking forward to sink you (or be sunk).

 

2

Share this post


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

HMS Rodney (Nelson class BB) torpedoed Bismark - it carried the 24.5" torpedoes, the biggest in RN inventory.

I just hope the 18” RN Mk1 naval gun has more or less shell damage (1415) as the 18” gun or Yamato (17xx)......

-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Templar figured it out.

Thanks for the info Dav, can't stand gamelin or any of her sister ships anyway.

Gonna edit baldrick's bottom line(don't get mad at me please)

This is a simple game for Fast Fun online battles. Unfortunately most battles are fast and rarely fun anymore. A good Fair well-balanced match is hard to come by. Just last night I played a game that ended 11-0. How does that happen?

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Davmak said:

I just hope the 18” RN Mk1 naval gun has more or less shell damage (1415) as the 18” gun or Yamato (17xx)......

Nelson had 16" guns. The 18" guns were to be installed on Furious in single turrets (2x2x1695 in game denoting twin turrets) before the project was cancelled (Furious was outfitted as aircraft carrier) and the guns were ultimately installed on monitors (coastal bombardment ships).

Still the Furious is an interesting ship - and certainly powerful for lvl32

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

16 hours ago, Joseph Templar said:

Now for class of ships. I dont what they were thinking. But i think they just want to simplified things. But i dont like it. Hood, the Great Britain ship, biggest ship in the world before Bismarck. Is a BB? No of course not! Actually she was a Battlecruiser. BC Class. But for now i wouldnt blame them for doing that because in every nation fleet, they may have less or no BC at all. 

I dislike that they make Hood so huge and in reality Hood had only 410 ft long, even shorter than a Gangut (594ft).

And for BC, I’d welcome some BB50 can become faster as they have lower hull. Reducing shell damage can be considered for game balance. As such BB50 can compete with CA41 and also have higher survivability from strong BBs in GB. 

0

Share this post


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

I dislike that they make Hood so huge and in reality Hood had only 410 ft long, even shorter than a Gangut (594ft).

According to the Royal Navy the Hood was 262m/860ft. Bigger than Nelson (216m/710ft), King George V (227m/745ft) and Bismark (251m/823ft). At 42500t normal displacement was also heavier than Nelson and about the same with King George and Bismark.

Source Wikipedia - Hood cross-checked with RN Archives

1

Share this post


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

According to the Royal Navy the Hood was 262m/860ft. Bigger than Nelson (216m/710ft), King George V (227m/745ft) and Bismark (251m/823ft). At 42500t normal displacement was also heavier than Nelson and about the same with King George and Bismark.

Source Wikipedia - Hood cross-checked with RN Archives

Thanks Baldrick! I should check the fact sheet of other ship wrongly!

So the BB Hood should in such huge size.

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0