This round is just a highlight from the World of Warships stream last week. I wound up in a round with Business 6 while in Jean Bart. Jean Bart really is a fun ship, though a tad strong.
I still think Kronshtadt Musashi and the eventual Alaska are better options for the Free XP
i have the coal for the Musashi and im holding out to see what the other ships are like first.
I’m saving up the coal for Salem. Just not a fan of any of the T9’s so far.
Yeah, they come to snuff the Worcester! oh yeah, yeeaahh…
Nice vid. I’m tired of WG making WoWs like WoT. Since when did BBs shoot from behind islands? In fact, there ARE no islands in the ocean (or too few to be significant). I’m done with this BS game. But nice vid. Good job.
VuHien2011 I am replying to you now though. Who do you think is a better authority on validity of sources? You, a random person online, or Yale University? If you search, “are memoirs a primary source” the 2nd result is from Yale University and according to them, a memoir is a primary source. In fact, after biographies, memoirs where the next example of a typical primary source. You’re trying to tell me a primary source isn’t good enough and what you’re bringing to the party is your own personal opinion. Call me crazy, but I don’t rate your opinion higher than that of the people who fought the battles we’re arguing about.
a memoir is a primary source for what that captain in thinking, not that he represents his whole nation, or in a wider perspective Navy captains in general. In this book, he just tell the story of his life and the different events he had the opportunity to participate. From where do you extrapolate that this is what all the captains are doing? As I painfully try to make you understand, a memoir is a memoir, a memoir is not a standard procedure on how to deal with enemy ships taught at the Naval Academy. If tomorrow, I write a memoir of my career as Staff Technical Support engineer which I am, does it represent the Work Instruction about how to do things as a Technical Support Engineer?
VuHien2011 I don’t extrapolate at all. I also don’t need to extrapolate. There are so many examples from so many different sources, and, most importantly, my specific point is that the notion “this thing was never done” is false. There only need to be 1 instance ever of anyone ever purposefully doing “the thing” and the are literally hundreds. As a reminder, I’m putting forth, and supporting the claim that A) locations of islands, not just island bases, but all land masses found in the sea, had frequent and profound impacts of the strategy of campaigns and the tactics employed in battle and B) that for the purpose of avoiding observation, both visual, by radar, and even sometimes by air, ships made use of cover provided by islands. I don’t claim they poked their noses out and fired, or that they took cover from enemy shell fire behind points of land, or any other in game gimmicky thing. I also don’t care if something was an improvised tactic by one ship’s officer one time ever, or if it was planned by a higher ranking officer, or if it was a standard fleet doctrine. Point A is practically self evident. Terrain influences battles. Its not exactly a new or difficult concept. Point B only need to occur 1 documented time, which is extremely easily established.
Terrain obviously influences battles on land. Now, what is the percentage of surface occupied by islands compared to the surface of the whole ocean? The probability that 2 enemy ships encounter in the middle of nowhere is vastly superior to the probability that they encounter near an island. This game is all about battle naval. I stick with it so does Tom Voke. You are out of topic and on the wrong forum if you want to refer to the use of islands for any other purpose. I can also use the example of the usage of islands to replenish foods but who cares? it is out of topic.
VuHien2011 I’m not off topic at all. The topic was whether or not naval battles were fought close enough for islands to be an influencing factor, and more specifically if ships used then got cover. As to the change of ships meeting in the open sea, the chances of that are actually less likely than meeting near some significant land mass. Naval battles are fought to control sea lanes between points ashore. They are fought to defend, damage, or take bases. They are fought to support troops on the ground etc. All the things to fight over are on land. Then again, it depends on the theater, or the war, or the time period of the war. In the Atlantic theater there were a lot more battles in open seas. For one thing, the North Atlantic has a lot fewer land masses in it, but also the objective was usually either convoy defense or convoy attack. Thus, actions were usually fought close to convoys and in the open. In the Mediterranean, there were some instances of action closer to land, but it was still largely about convoys. In the Pacific, almost all action was in close proximity to land and fighting in the littoral wasn’t even that uncommon. Anyway, I’m going to bed now. You’re a bet quality of person to argue with then the vast majority I encounter online.
Excellent video! The Jean Bart is coming to my port as soon as it is released!
Just to let you know it pronounce like John Bar.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *