WG Fest 2018: RN CVs and USSR BBs – World of Warships

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (834 votes, average: 4.87 out of 5)

Discussing Wargaming Fest announcements of British Aircraft Carriers and Soviet Battleships. Hope you have a wonderful day and I’ll catch you next time!

https://playtogether.worldofwarships.com/invite/OwzqAkj – Warships Friend Invite

https://discord.gg/33xzEjR – Discord Server


  1. A whole line of paper ships from a navy that did nothing in either world war and no Regia Marina…I guess more content though ??‍♂️

  2. Just wonder if the Russian BB sigma will be 2.6… 😉

  3. The only things I dislike about the CV rework is the fact that we get only 4 tiers of CVs (the hole idea of 2 lines doesnt go down well with me), and that theres no TB at T4 (at least with the japanese), also its kinda hard to control the planes if it was only mouse or only keyboard it would be better IMO.
    Wait?! Sovetsky Soyuz is T9? I wonder whats the T10 gonna be…

    • Well SS was the size of a Montana but had only Iowa fire power, so expect the T10 to be as big as GK, if not bigger, but with Montana or Conqueror guns. At least in this game the Red Navy has issues giving their big ships equally big guns. Just look at Mokva, Kron and Stalingrad

    • Fernando Marques кремл, with conqueror style gun selection (457 and 406), 2 superfiring forward 1 rear. Smaller then GK but higher displacement.

    • Sovetsky Soyuz was huge because like the Germans the loading systems for the guns was inefficient and the steel for the armour was garbage even with 17 inchs of steel it was only considered to have armour protection comparable to Hood.

    • João Pedro Couto Cruz

      T10 is a planned improved version of SS, project 24 or 23bis, cant exactly remember.

    • apenas um nome de canal

      CV starting at tier 6 is great, t3 and t4 ships don’t stand a chance angaist a cv(except angaist noobs wich are common in t4 but not everyone), and most t5 ships also can’t deffend themselfs.

  4. The increased accuracy consumable in the Twilight matches was WG testing the Russian BB sigma.

  5. USSR BBs. Are you serious ???

  6. Not very impressed with the Soviet HMS Nelson.

  7. Underbird [former X8X8]

    All hail the paper navy!

  8. So Lenin is a Nelson with Kirov guns as her secondaries

  9. I’m fully on board this hype train for both lines but especially for the Brit CVs. Carpet bombing? Very interesting. Can’t wait!

  10. No new maps, but hey paper ships are good, especially when they will be OP Soviet ships that will most certainly be dominating the real historical ships in the game.

    • +Jerry Glaze lol do you even read your own words? You are contradicting yourself.
      “Shores has instant fire with every shell”
      “wvery salvo i got a fire”
      You went from a 100% fire chance per shell to a fire chance around 8.3%, which, as I should mention, is actually close to the listed fire chance if you know the game mechanics and how to apply them. 12% fire chance per shell, fire resistance coefficient is 0.7 for an upgraded T7 hull, leaves us at 8.4%. Cleveland back when she was a T6 had an even greater chance of setting a fire. But wait, Cleveland was not Russian, she could never be OP, right?

      Aside from that, your “evidence” is highly subjective, lacks any real substance and you try to prove things by simply repeating your statement. Prove that Khabarovsk is OP. Don’t repeat the same statement over and over again despite clear evidence that it’s false. You are trying to pull this one here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion

    • +Mario As a long time Moskva player I can tell you the only thing exceptional about the Moskva is its ability to tank damage when bow on assuming there isn’t a British bb or German cruisers spamming HE at you. It doesn’t really have the dpm of other cruisers and relies on broadsides to deal decent damage which is pretty hard to find in high tiered games. It doesn’t have the maneuverability to bring the rear turret into action while remaining safe from large caliber ap shells. Besides experienced bbs will just shoot your upper bow and get a crap ton of pen damage. It is definitely a pain to remove when played properly but it is definitely not overpowered.

    • Jerry Glaze you need to work on your English. I never said it was op. Personally I think it kinda sucks, it’s spotted at the same range as cruisers.

    • +Mc Nuffin Not to mention its Rudder Shift is literally worse than most T10 Cruisers.

    • +Jinyu Liu I agree moskva aint completely broken I play it myself and I know it got some .. weak spots . Even more annoying than concealment is rudder/turning circle – seriously some BBs turn way smoother than this thing.

      But it doesn’t mean that over 65k hp cruiser with insane radar/good defensive AA needed this 50mm plate in front. Seriously don’t cheat yourself with exception of Curry Wurst noone I mean noone got such armor even Yamato Montana or so … Lets not go to extreme where cruisers are more tanky than battleships.

      It just feels wrong when I citadel BBs through Nose and Moskva just … bounces for 0 damage. It’s really … feeling so weird.
      But then again Moskva aint broken as Stalingrad so I would leave it as it is now.

  11. Where is the rest of the Italian Navy???

    • Taking a lunch break

    • +Mc Nuffin At the end of Italy’s Fascist involvement in WWII, 1943, Italy had the fourth largest navy in the world. Her battle fleet was comprised of:
      2 incomplete and damaged aircraft carriers
      5 battleships
      9 cruisers
      11 destroyers
      22 frigates
      19 corvettes
      12 submarines

      Yes, they at least, had a navy.

    • Delayed because clearly paper russkie ships are more important. To be fair, Soviets did use several Italian designed ships or actual Italian ships…

    • +Mc Nuffin They may not utilize they navy much, but they still had bigger one than Russia did.

    • +Al Capwned Yuuuuuuup. So it would make much more sense to implement those ships in the Italian tree first than focus on the Russia.

  12. “Carpet bombing” I now need a USS Hornet with B-25s

  13. Slowly going toward WoT style of “idea” projects. Later we will get premium US ship with tomahawks for little price of 150$

    • Inevitable really there are only so many ship classes and far fewer nations built big gun warships than have tanks.

      I have since the game was announced believed that wargaming made a mistake in focusing on getting WW2 ships in game as quick as possible as WW2 was what rendered gun armed war ships obsolete.

      Unlike tanks and planes where WW2 saw massive improvement from what where only 25 year old military vehicles warships had a long history before WW2 which is just rushed over to get to the twilight of the warship.

      Warships would have benefited from a 12 tier system and starting with ships from the 1880’s not every line or nation has to go to the highest tier.

  14. I’m all for content…. but only if it’s balanced and I’m pretty sure these won’t be balanced…

    • Yeah I can see how they pull prank on players – after all Battleships are “pinacle of food chain” in this game. Not that they are best but biggest and got huge guns. So if there is time to pull off some real bullshit and make biased ships – then it’s WG best opportunity – and I’m pretty sure they won’t miss it.

  15. what happened to the Italian battleships?

    • For what it’s worth, I don’t think that you’d see Italian BBs until after Italian cruisers were released, which would seem to lead to the BBs not coming until 2020, since I’d be hard pressed to think that they’d released 2 lines from the same nation in the same year, if one assumes that the Italian cruisers get released in 2019.

    • João Pedro Couto Cruz

      Its is likely that the cruiser line will be implemented first, probably in the second half of 2019.

    • russia is re-writing history….again. let’s make paper ships instead of ones that really fought in ww2

    • They surrendered to the Russians

    • Its so sad. The Italians were the fourth most important navy, and we get this almost completely fake Russian bias line.

  16. Tier X should be Stalin, with special Consumables that could starved other ship consumable

    • Are you plebs still beating the drum of “stalin is muh battleship” just stop, it’s getting so old.

    • Ranari's Brawling Channel

      No, no, Joseph Stalin should be a unique commander for 200,000 coal that you can purchase in the arsenal, and every time you get a kill with him as the commander, a loud voice roars in your enemy’s ears, “YOU GO TO GULAG!”.

    • No comrade

      Consumables: Dead hand of Stalin
      -100% chance Citadels on Enemy ship
      Hard Bass Speed Boost
      -Ship max speed +10000%
      -100% Chance of self Detection due to the Hard Bass is being played
      The Little Ivan
      – Spawn Kv-2 every 10 secs as secondary guns (Kv-2 will also affects the Stalinium)
      – Send every enemy ship to the Gulag after they sunk (unable to use the ship for 1year)

      Passive ability:
      -reflect all type of shells
      Russian Bias
      -HE will caused 100% Chance of Detonation on enemy CA,CL and DDs
      -AA will do 1000000 damage on enemy aircraft
      – make the guns land on target 70%
      – Reloading time decreased 29secs (the original is 30s)

    • Jerry Glaze Italian suffered from a severe shortage of fuel for their ships and could not operate at a requisite level. This lead to less sea time for each ship and crew, This leads to less training in gunnery, engineering casualty response, and overall seamanship. Lack of a delegate naval air arm was crippling too as they had to rely on the Regia Aeronautica which there was much inter service rivalry. So any time a naval unit needed air cover or immediate assistance a request had to go up the naval chain of command then sent over to Air Force for approval and then back down to whoever was making a request, you can imagine how that would be devastating in a quick situation. The RM also did not develop radar on the same level as the RN or USN which lead them to only engage in clear sunny weather or they would typically break off engagements. The RN though was far better prepared with naval air power and radar not to mention most likely best trained sailors of the time. Mussolini also did not like risking his capital ships so he kept his commanders on a short leash so even when aggressive action was called for usually commanders where reeled in by higher authority. Hope this helped!

    • special consumable: Gulag

  17. Complain on RU paper BB

    While playing ships like Harugumo, Mino, Zao, Kurfurst, Conqueror, Montana, ……..

    • +Bierstadt54 None of the Montana class laid down.

    • +arif bajuri True, but the orders were placed. The Montanas were not fictional ships, nor were they some mere design study.

    • +Bierstadt54 Most the russian bbs to were laid down or ordered, just never completed. The best example of this is thr Sovietsky and the Izmail or even the Nikolai. The Gangut class were finish, the Imperatrista too but the last one never made it pass the 1930’s anf the Gangut class did participate in eorld war 2 and were a priority target for the luffwaffe.

    • Space Marine Chaplain

      arif bajuri At least on other nations tech trees, paper ships were the exception not the rule. But from what they look like now,Soviet BB’s are the opposite of that.

    • Ok. So one or two ships out of each of those individual lines are a paper designs.

      Compare that to Russia where at least half of them will be paper designs… And that’s just for a single line…

  18. So the Gangut is in the game twice? That’s the pre-Soviet name of the Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya.

  19. Russian BBs: ONE commissioned, 2 laid down, SIX completely invented! Hooray for WG and their paper ships! Meanwhile, in St. Petersburg: “Italian Cruisers? Battleships? NEVER heard of Regia Marina, Italians never built ships, not even for us!”

    • Space Marine Chaplain

      João Pedro Couto Cruz Having *some* paper or incomplete ships are fine,but having a tech tree made up of 90% paper ships gets just a little bit ridiculous. And gameplay wise, it’s probably gonna be a shitshow considering WGs habit of either making a ship completely OP or completely trash.

    • TomsonPRoDuctions in WW2 the russian navy didn’t do much besides some shore bombardment. Their navy was not a priority to them. All of their shipyards were under attack by both German army and aviation forces. Building huge floating targets would have been a waste of resources for them. In fact, the Italians went through the same problem, when they bombed and torpedoed their own ships.

    • João Pedro Couto Cruz

      +Space Marine Chaplain Yes, I am aware of WGs uncanny ability to make things really bad, I wont and cant disagree with you in this point. I am also a huge fan o tank history and for years I have seen WG butcher community ideias and wishes, i.e. releasing good potencial TT tanks as Premiums, removing traditional maps, etc. I honestly fail to understand some of their proposals. But I will disagree respectfully with you in your claim regarding the Russian TT. If 9/10 of the whole tree is composed of paper ships, I ask you for the evidence.

    • Space Marine Chaplain

      João Pedro Couto Cruz Only the Gangut class and the Imperatritsa Mariya class were built and served as battleships, the rest were either not completed (Imperator Nikolai I and some of the Sovetsky Soyuz class) or were never built in the first place.

    • João Pedro Couto Cruz

      +Space Marine Chaplain Hmm… Is that all? Before I discuss about your comment, I want you to show me that 90 per cent of the tech tree is “paper”. This includes the Destroyer and Cruiser lines and Premium ships. You said tech tree, which engulfs the whole thing, you didnt say BB line or branch. And even if you said, the numbers are not 9/10 according to your comment, which I didnt even touch yet. I will give you some more time to think and do research. Have a good day, mate.

  20. Tier X will have 12 460mm guns with 30 km range and 3.0 sigma

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.