Jay Gatsby Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 There will be this ship with 140 guns 32 lb? if they put it would probably be the most powerful ship in the game. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Pennsylvania_%281837%29 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Connor Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Not happening, way out of the game's time period (1670-1820) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Gatsby Posted January 28, 2015 Author Share Posted January 28, 2015 I seem to remember about 1700-1830 and the USS Pennsylvania was designed in 1821. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Connor Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Wasn't built till 1837. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagann Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 What a monster. Indeed, it's 1830. But i think devs care about the launch date, not the the laid down date, even if the construction was delayed. However, never say never. it could change The problem i see with this ship is its huge shell guns. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Gatsby Posted January 28, 2015 Author Share Posted January 28, 2015 Should count the year of design, and not the end of construction. The HMS Trincomalee was designed in 1816 and the USS Pennsylvania in 1821 with only 5 years apart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meatpukk Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Dont think they should stretch the timeframe even more.and the Trincomalee is a ship from the Leda class where Leda was launched in 1800 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagann Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Should count the year of design, and not the end of construction. The HMS Trincomalee was designed in 1816 and the USS Pennsylvania in 1821 with only 5 years apart I agree with you, as long as the delayed date do not bring improvements of 1840 in a 1821 design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mirones Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 8inch ~200mm guns 18 in total alone will brake all gamebalance same reason why we had to take the mortar brig out. i rather take the independence with 90x32lb guns heavyier boardside than Victory or Trinidad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Gatsby Posted January 28, 2015 Author Share Posted January 28, 2015 Dont think they should stretch the timeframe even more. and the Trincomalee is a ship from the Leda class where Leda was launched in 1800 It is true, I was wrong, however, should count the same year of design and not the construction year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Gatsby Posted January 28, 2015 Author Share Posted January 28, 2015 Sono d'accordo con te, fino a quando la data di ritardo non portano miglioramenti del 1840 in un design 1821. I just hope they will put this ship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Connor Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Should count the year of design, and not the end of construction. The HMS Trincomalee was designed in 1816 and the USS Pennsylvania in 1821 with only 5 years apart As meatpukk says,Trincomalee is a Leda class frigate, and the design for these dates from 1796 (when HMS Leda was ordered). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Megiddo Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 I agree with Dagann that thing is a monster! Another one of the things I love about this game is all the great info being discussed... one of my hobbies as a kid, I've learned more in these weeks than I did in years. (albeit no internet back in ye ol-yester century) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mirones Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 and dont forget that she will be more of a brick than our Nuestra Senora de la Santisima Trinidad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTMatt Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Would prefer to see a US third rate first. It does look cool but I'm a bigger fan of basic frigates and third rates since they the workhorses of every fleet. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max_86 Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 No please...I don't get why people in online games always want BIGGER, FASTER, MOAR in general vehicles. It's like the Horten in WT or fantasy tanks in WoT. Yes, bigger could seem cool and funnier, but are you sure? This is a ship born at the end of the game timeframe (or after), with a firepower capable of destroying everything else, with a negligible service career. Why choosing this ship instead of vessels that made history in the timeframe? It's like all the people in WT that want that special Bf 109 version only built as a prototipe or that Yak that only exists in blueprints, while the game has only one P-40 version available. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTMatt Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 No please...I don't get why people in online games always want BIGGER, FASTER, MOAR in general vehicles. It's like the Horten in WT or fantasy tanks in WoT. Yes, bigger could seem cool and funnier, but are you sure? This is a ship born at the end of the game timeframe (or after), with a firepower capable of destroying everything else, with a negligible service career. Why choosing this ship instead of vessels that made history in the timeframe? It's like all the people in WT that want that special Bf 109 version only built as a prototipe or that Yak that only exists in blueprints, while the game has only one P-40 version available. To be fair if no game ever adds special stuff then every game will be the same, noticed there were many tank games before WOT rose to fame and I suspect it was the special tanks that made it stand out. Not to mention the odds of having that ship in an age of sail game may not come around again until 10-20 years later and that is if we dont come back to this "it kills my immersion" reasoning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greybuscat Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 I think some of you guys are silly about the timeframe. It matters as far as tactics and weaponry, otherwise you're just bitching about an arbitrary date. Was the USS Pennsylvania firing explosive shells out of guns measured in inches, and sporting iron armor? Was it steam-powered or a full-blown schooner, instead of being square rigged? If the answer is no to any and all of these kinds of questions, what's so hard about just letting the devs decide what is and what isn't within timeframe? If you want to express an actual opinion, that looks like this: "I DON'T THINK THAT REALLY FITS THE TIMEFRAME." See how it's phrased as a personal judgment, not as an absolute? So there's room for "discussion" on this "discussion forum?" No please...I don't get why people in online games always want BIGGER, FASTER, MOAR in general vehicles. It's like the Horten in WT or fantasy tanks in WoT. Yes, bigger could seem cool and funnier, but are you sure?This is a ship born at the end of the game timeframe (or after), with a firepower capable of destroying everything else, with a negligible service career. Why choosing this ship instead of vessels that made history in the timeframe?It's like all the people in WT that want that special Bf 109 version only built as a prototipe or that Yak that only exists in blueprints, while the game has only one P-40 version available. This, at least, is an opinion, even if it's a cynical, regressive one. Why have anything but trade ships, with that logic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Connor Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 No please...I don't get why people in online games always want BIGGER, FASTER, MOAR in general vehicles. It's like the Horten in WT or fantasy tanks in WoT. Yes, bigger could seem cool and funnier, but are you sure? I don't like WoT for this reason (among others), everyone is running around in paper tanks and prototypes, the real tanks that fought in WW2 are all but forgotten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greybuscat Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 I don't like WoT for this reason (among others), everyone is running around in paper tanks and prototypes, the real tanks that fought in WW2 are all but forgotten. It sure is lovely the way so many people complain about War Thunder and World of Tanks on this Naval Action forum. You know, instead of complaining to the people that made those games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max_86 Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Already done mate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Connor Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 It sure is lovely the way so many people complain about War Thunder and World of Tanks on this Naval Action forum. You know, instead of complaining to the people that made those games. I stopped playing them. Besides, not like they will remove tanks or aircraft they have already built (especially for reasons that would cover half the units ingame). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Illusive Tabby Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Part of the reason so few will want a US linehship is the fact that the US built so few, and a large portion of US players will want to play as the US...and want a US lineship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prater Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 We can use the Bellona or other lineships though. Let's concentrate on more important ships, such as merchants, privateers, more warships of different types. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mirones Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Part of the reason so few will want a US linehship is the fact that the US built so few, and a large portion of US players will want to play as the US...and want a US lineship. wont change the fact she is out of timeline and worse in handling than the trinidad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts