Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Marshall99 said:

In my opinion wikipedia is fine. In my university we often use it because most of the time it is reliable. 

Also there was a russian protected cruiser, Cruiser Askold which was a very advanced ship when she was constructed. She was a very fast protected cruiser with a unique look, and she also had an active career. 

Just looked up the Askold. The profile reminds me of the Omaha-class. Also, funnels much? lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 272
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hello Admirals, We would like to share the latest information about the upcoming “Core Patch 1: Mission Mechanics Test” which will include the first playable version of the Campaign, in a very li

I understand games development can be fickle or run into problems unexpectedly. However, even a few screenshots wouldn't hurt now and then. I know i'm repeating myself, but i seriously dislike th

Ok, I have been a silent reader now since 2019, when I first bought the game. Seriously devs, what the hello kitty is going on. Where the hell is the patch/infos about it or the general state of the g

Posted Images

1 hour ago, Marshall99 said:

In my opinion wikipedia is fine. In my university we often use it because most of the time it is reliable. 

Also there was a russian protected cruiser, Cruiser Askold which was a very advanced ship when she was constructed. She was a very fast protected cruiser with a unique look, and she also had an active career. 

The very creator of Wikipedia himself has explicitly made it clear that Wikipedia in its current state is ill suited for serious citing. Its a great place to find sources hidden beneath countless layers of bullcrap, but otherwise its terrible. 

It has a literal cabal of hand rubbing sociopaths who control it lmao.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, time for me to ramble about Imperial Russian Warships and to clear up some misconceptions, bias and phobia.

No, Russia for the most part did not build quality warships in any way shape or form. This is not bias, this is fact. The simple reason, with out getting overly long winded is that Imperial Russia just didn't have the infrastructure or industry and really wasn't "modren enough" to build these warships and on top of that the Russian Navy has always placed second in priority to the Russian Army given Russia's limited access to the ocean. 

Fact is, for the most part, most of the Imperial Russian Navies most successful or well built ships were designed or/and built in foreign yards to Russian specifications or needs, and domestically built iterations in a class were of poorer quality. How many Russian ships were built abroad? At least half of their destroyers and torpedo boats were either built in France or Germany, primarily in Elbing, or La Harve or La Seyne. Roughly half of their protected cruiser fleet was either entirely or in part built abroad in America, France or Germany. While a non-insignificant amount of their Armored cruisers and a small number of their pre-dreadnought battleships were American, French or British.  Even their dreadnought battleships were, in part, foreign designed.

To back up these statements I cite the following.

Of the 18 classes of Destroyer or TBD, 9 were foreign built or designed. The Sokol class TBD was designed in Britain, with the lead ship being built in London. The Leitenant Burakov was built in Germany. The Kit Class was built entirely in Germany. The Forel class was built entirely in France. The Som Class was built in Britain. The Leitenant Burakov class was entirely built in France. The Kapitan Yurasovskiy class was entirely built in Germany. The Vsadnik class was entirely built in Germany. The uh... aforementioned Novik class destroyers were *cough cough* designed by Germany. Woops... 

2 of 5 classes of Armored Cruisers were designed or built abroad. The Bayan Class Armored cruisers were built in France and the (second) Rurik class was built by Vickers.

Of the 11 classes of Protected Cruisers, 7 were foreign designed and built. The Admiral Kornilov was built in France. The Protected cruiser Varyag was built in America as was the Prut though she was originally for the ottomans but ended up in Russian hands as a war prize. The Askold (aforementioned) which was the fastest cruiser in the Russian Navy and the Novik (not to be mistaken with the destriyer) another world renown cruiser, as well as the Izumurd, the Bogatyr, and though seized and never delivered the Muraviev Amurski class were all built in Germany. The Boyarin was built by the Danes. Many of these ships were the lead ship of their class and subsequent ships were built at home. These domestic copies, built to foreign designs and in many cases with foreign machinery and equipment we're of poorer quality. 

1 of their 2 classes of Torpedo Cruisers, the Kazarskii class were designed by and mostly built in Germany.

The Russians built most of their pre-dreadnought battleships with a few notable exceptions. The Retvizan class were built in America. The Tsesarevich was built in France, and the Borodino class were of French design - basically poor copies of the Tsesarevich. 

Even the Russian Gangut class Dreadnoughts were heavily designed by the British. 

It wasn't until Russia became Soviet Russia that their navy switched to almost entirely domestically built warships entirely because everyone hated commies and didn't want to help them, with the only foreign built in service being lend-lease and captured warships. Even still, soviet naval rosters are dwarfed by the number of ships in service under the Tsar.

 

So. There ya go.

 

Post more fish.

 huso-huso.jpg

Edited by Fishyfish
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Fishyfish said:

Okay, time for me to ramble about Imperial Russian Warships and to clear up some misconceptions, bias and phobia.

No, Russia for the most part did not build quality warships in any way shape or form, though some of their ships and ship classes were exceptional. This is not bias, this is fact. The simple reason, with out getting overly long winded is that Imperial Russia just didn't have the infrastructure or industry to build these warships and on top of that the Russian Navy has always placed second in priority to the Russian Army given Russia's limited access to the ocean. 

Fact is, for the most part, most of the Imperial Russian Navies most successful or well built ships were designed or/and built in foreign yards to Russian specifications or needs, and domestically built iterations in a class were of poorer quality. How many Russian ships were built abroad? At least half of their destroyers and torpedo boats were either built in France or Germany, primarily in Elbing, or La Harve or La Seyne. Roughly half of their protected cruiser fleet was either entirely or in part built abroad in America, France or Germany. While a non-insignificant amount of their Armored cruisers and a small number of their pre-dreadnought battleships were American, French or British.  Even their dreadnought battleships were, in part, foreign designed.

To back up these statements I cite the following.

Of the 18 classes of Destroyer or TBD, 9 were foreign built or designed. The Sokol class TBD was designed in Britain, with the lead ship being built in London. The Leitenant Burakov was built in Germany. The Kit Class was built entirely in Germany. The Forel class was built entirely in France. The Som Class was built in Britain. The Leitenant Burakov class was entirely built in France. The Kapitan Yurasovskiy class was entirely built in Germany. The Vsadnik class was entirely built in Germany. The uh... aforementioned Novik class destroyers were *cough cough* designed by Germany. Woops... 

2 of 5 classes of Armored Cruisers were designed or built abroad. The Bayan Class Armored cruisers were built in France and the (second) Rurik class was built by Vickers.

Of the 11 classes of Protected Cruisers, 7 were foreign designed and built. The Admiral Kornilov was built in France. The Protected cruiser Varyag was built in America as was the Prut though she was originally for the ottomans but ended up in Russian hands as a war prize. The Askold (aforementioned) which was the fastest cruiser in the Russian Navy and the Novik (not to be mistaken with the destriyer) another world renown cruiser, as well as the Izumurd, the Bogatyr, and though seized and never delivered the Muraviev Amurski class were all built in Germany. The Boyarin was built by the Danes. Many of these ships were the lead ship of their class and subsequent ships were built at home. These domestic copies, built to foreign designs and in many cases with foreign machinery and equipment we're of poorer quality. 

1 of their 2 classes of Torpedo Cruisers, the Kazarskii class were designed by and mostly built in Germany.

The Russians built most of their pre-dreadnought battleships with a few notable exceptions. The Retvizan class were built in America. The Tsesarevich was built in France, and the Borodino class were of French design - basically poor copies of the Tsesarevich. 

Even the Russian Gangut class Dreadnoughts were heavily designed by the British. 

It wasn't until Russia became Soviet Russia that their navy switched to almost entirely domestically built warships entirely because everyone hated commies and didn't want to help them, with the only foreign built in service being lend-lease and captured warships. Even still, soviet naval rosters are dwarfed by the number of ships in service under the Tsar.

 

So. There ya go.

 

Post more fish.

 huso-huso.jpg 

Thank you for the informations!

I give you a fish for them.

434e734c-8c2a-44b9-b26d-ec086b4add15-114

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Marshall99 said:

Thank you for the informations!

I give you a fish for them.

434e734c-8c2a-44b9-b26d-ec086b4add15-114

Of course! Believe it or not, despite my scathing reply above the Imperial Russian Navy is one of my favorite. So many jankey and odd looking battleships.

 

More fish till patch. 

164942.jpg?1625360875

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Fishyfish said:

Of course! Believe it or not, despite my scathing reply above the Imperial Russian Navy is one of my favorite. So many jankey and odd looking battleships.

 

More fish till patch. 

164942.jpg?1625360875

Exactly! I love those old ships. They are so beautiful. Even the eels like those.

Green-Morey-Eel.jpg

You see. She is smiling, because she saw some nice old boats.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

Okay, time for me to ramble about Imperial Russian Warships and to clear up some misconceptions, bias and phobia...

This is much better. Not without nonsense, but a league better than "this is Russian propaganda."

2 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

The uh... aforementioned Novik class destroyers were *cough cough* designed by Germany. Woops... 

Yes, that's what I meant about "unpleasant things about Novik". Novik was a German project based on Russian demands like "we need a better ship."

2 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

2 of 5 classes of Armored Cruisers were designed or built abroad. The Bayan Class Armored cruisers were built in France and the (second) Rurik class was built by Vickers.

The things you conveniently forgot to add that Russian Imperial Navy actually had 13 armored cruisers (minus Azov and Minin), ten of which were built in Russia. This includes the Boyan class, two of the four were built in Russia. And all four of these cruisers - Rurik II and three Boyan were completely outdated by the time they were launched. Because in 1906 it was too late for armored cruisers anyway. So only the lead ship - Boyan, had some value in the Russo-Japanese war.

Nevertheless, Rurik 1 performed well in the battle with the Japanese, if not for the golden shot at the steering. It was also the first large raider. I also do not consider Petropavlovsk-class  as bad. They were at least did not concede Fuji class, built in England.

2 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

...Izumurd...

Izumrud-class cruiser was a Russian variation of the Novik cruiser and was built in Russia.

2 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

Muraviev Amurski class

Was confiscated by the Germans and never served in the Russian fleet. 

2 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

It wasn't until Russia became Soviet Russia that their navy switched to almost entirely domestically built warships entirely because everyone hated commies and didn't want to help them, with the only foreign built in service being lend-lease and captured warships. Even still, soviet naval rosters are dwarfed by the number of ships in service under the Tsar.

And here are come myths. Project 1 was based on HMS Codrington, the blueprints of which were purchased (siс!) from the British. Project 7 was based on the Maestrale class destroyers, with the help of the Italians in its design. A similar story happened with Kirov and Raimondo Montecuccoli-cruisers.  Tashkent-class destroyer was built in Italy by order of the USSR. Soviet Union-class battleships were based on Italian battleships blueprints. A propulsion system for the lead ship was purchased in Switzerland. The Germans sold the USSR cruiser Lützow. S-class submarine was also designed by Germans.

So no. Like all correct capitalists, as long as the communists were willing to pay, there were those who were willing to sell. Demand creates supply.
The United States refused to provide the Soviet commission with any naval technologies, although the USSR was interested in the Faragut destroyers and was ready to pay for the battleship design. It is understandable why, anyone with a strong navy is a threat to the United States, it is obvious. 

2 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

Even still, soviet naval rosters are dwarfed by the number of ships in service under the Tsar.

The Soviet Union built more cruisers first class for twenty years (1935-1955) than the Russian Empire built for all its history. And  Project 68 was pretty quality.funny-military-seals-wwii-victory-day-ru

Edited by TAKTCOM
WAR FOR IMPROVEMENT
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TAKTCOM said:

Yes, that's what I meant about "unpleasant things about Novik". Novik was a German project based on Russian demands like "we need a better ship."

No where in any of your previous posts do you alude at all to the Noviks being German Designs. No where, saying "you may read some unpleasant things about the Noviks" while holding onto the notion that they were The best destroyers in the world and they were Russian is not admitting that they were technically speaking, not Russian. Nice back peddling.  

 

1 hour ago, TAKTCOM said:

The things you conveniently forgot to add that Russian Imperial Navy actually had 13 armored cruisers (minus Azov and Minin), ten of which were built in Russia. This includes the Boyan class, two of the four were built in Russia. And all four of these cruisers - Rurik II and three Boyan were completely outdated by the time they were launched. Because in 1906 it was too late for armored cruisers anyway. So only the lead ship - Boyan, had some value in the Russo-Japanese war.

I didn't forget to add anything. You lack reading comprehension. 13 armored cruisers consisting of 5 different classes. A class of ship is a set of ships built to a similar, often times identical design. Do you really want to bring up the 3 classes of psudo-armored frigates classified as armored cruisers built during the 1870s and 80s that were obsolete upon completion? The General-Admiral class? The Vladimir Monomakh? The Admiral Nakhimov?

How about how the Rurik, Rossia and Gromoboi were horribly out classed by the British HMS Powerful and HMS Terrible built to counter them?

1 hour ago, TAKTCOM said:

Izumrud-class cruiser was a Russian variation of the Novik cruiser and was built in Russia.

And they were inferior to the Cruiser Novik. Novik, Speed 25 knots, Range 5000 nautical miles. Izumrud, speed 24 knots, range 3790 nautical miles. Nearly identical dimensions, Novik is smaller by 24 tons. Hmmm.. 

1 hour ago, TAKTCOM said:

Was confiscated by the Germans and never served in the Russian fleet. 

 Uh, that's uh, kinda why I said.. 

3 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

and though seized and never delivered the Muraviev Amurski class were all built in Germany

That means that they were confiscated. When a ship is ordered in a foreign yard and is seized and never delivered they are, by definition, confiscated. 

1 hour ago, TAKTCOM said:

And here are come myths. Project 1 was based on HMS Codrington, the blueprints of which were purchased (siс!) from the British. Project 7 was based on the Maestrale class destroyers, with the help of the Italians in its design. A similar story happened with Kirov and Raimondo Montecuccoli-cruisers.  Tashkent-class destroyer was built in Italy by order of the USSR. Soviet Union-class battleships were based on Italian battleships blueprints. A propulsion system for the lead ship was purchased in Switzerland. The Germans sold the USSR cruiser Lützow. S-class submarine was also designed by Germans.

So no. Like all correct capitalists, as long as the communists were willing to pay, there were those who were willing to sell. Demand creates supply.

I see the bait was taken. My apologizes, I was trying to cleanly move away from the trash fire that was the ineffective and impotent soviet navy as I didn't want to get into that and was trying to focus on Russia's last competent navy. But if you really want me to get into that. Okay, here we go. 

First, you've already proven my point I was making above that the Russians couldn't develop or produce any domestic designs completely on their own. None of the ships you've stated were designed completely by the Russians. None of them. 

Project 1, the Leningrad class. 6 ships built in an absolutely disastrous program, they were more a copy of the french Vauquelin class and were mechanically a step above a failure. The soviets wildly overestimated their ability to build "large" warships and were woefully unprepared to build these destroyers. In some cases 90% of parts, machinery and equiptment produced for them were refused. Several critical aspects of their development such as their power plants and weapons weren't in development until, in some cases 3 years into the ships building. Top heavy, mechanically unreliable.

Project 7, the Gnevny class destroyer. Italian designed and engineered, they too suffered from mechanical unrealiability and had limited sea worthyness. However they were the largest group of surface warships built by the soviet navy, period. With between 29 and 31 being built depending on your sources. 

The Tashkent, 1 built, though a pretty decent ship all around. Some times you get it right, it helps when it's design is 100% an enlarged copy of an Italian destroyer, the Navigatori. Though for the time she was increadibly under armored and under armed. 

As yes, the Kirovs. Italian designed, Italian engineered, Soviet industry was not capable of designing such a large and complex vessel, as such the Ansaldo company, responsible for the Condotierri class was contacted. They provided the soviets with plans of their latest design, the Raimondo Montecuccoli-class cruisers. They also provided engineers and assistance in order to draw the final planes on Soviet specifications. 4 were built during the war and they basically hid in Leningrad and completed the occasional shore bombardment mission. 

Lel the Lutzow, sold to the soviets incomplete, never completed by the soviets, aside from functioning as a floating battery it never served as a functional warship. 

A propulsion system bought from a land locked country...? Really? Reallllly?

The Soviets never built any battleships, your argument there is null and void. Paper ships count for about as much as the ships you design in this game in the world of actual naval capabilities. 

So still no, the west wasn't willing to assists the soviets during the interwar period with their warship designs or construction. Citing support from Fascists states, which, mind you economically aren't capitalist does not mean what you think it means. There was no willingness to supply the soviets demands for war material until WW2 kicked off, because the enemy of my enemy is my ally. Thus why over the course of the war the United States supplied the Soviet Union a total of 17,499,861 tons of military equipment, supplies and food the Soviets couldn't produce. 

2 hours ago, TAKTCOM said:

The Soviet Union built more cruisers first class for twenty years (1935-1955) than the Russian Empire built for all its history. And  Project 68 was pretty quality.

1935 to 1955 the Soviets built the Svetlana Class, Admiral Nakhimov class, Kirov Class, Chapayev Class, and Sverdlov Class.

The Svetlana Class was designed and work started in the 1910s, under the Russian Empire. Finished by the Soviets. Well 1 was.

The Admiral Nakhimov class was designed and work started in the 1910s, under the Russian Empire. Finished by the Soviets. Well, 2 were.

We've already discussed the Kirov Class.

The Chapayev Class, rearmed and heavily modified Kirov Classes. Of the 17 planned, 5 were completed.

The Sverdlov Class, influenced by Italian, German and Soviet designs and projects prior to WW2 were "were left dangerously unprotected when operating in areas outside the cover of land-based aircraft. Their secondary mission, operating on their own as commerce raiders, was also compromised as they would be extremely vulnerable, in good weather, to USN Carrier Battle Groups equipped with modern strike aircraft and to the remaining Baltimore and Des Moines class cruisers equipped with 8 inch guns." But they did build 14.

So yes, you're right, 28 cruisers is more than 13. And how many Battleships did the soviets build? Because the Imperial Russian Navy build 26. 

Okay so, last but not least. 
 

2 hours ago, TAKTCOM said:

The United States refused to provide the Soviet commission with any naval technologies, although the USSR was interested in the Faragut destroyers and was ready to pay for the battleship design. It is understandable why, anyone with a strong navy is a threat to the United States, it is obvious. 

AHAHAHAH HAHAHA HAHAHA Oh, oh your serious, let me laugh harder! The Soviets, even with american purchased battleship designs and faragut destroyers a "strong navy"? A "threat to the United States"?

And how many aircraft carriers did the soviet union have, ever?

Lets look at some numbers. 

The Soviets started WW2 with 4 battleships, 10 cruisers, 59 destroyers and 218 submarines. 291 warships.

The Soviets would end the war with 4 battleships, 11 cruisers, 77 destroyers and 309 submarines. 401 warships. 

During the war they'd build 1 cruiser, 18 destroyers, and 91 Submarines. 

The US Navy ended WW2 with.... 29 battleships, 83 cruisers, 1125 destroyers, 344 submarines, 166 Aircraft Carriers (of all flavors) 

Yes, obvious. Very obvious. 

Which is why it's obvious that during the Cold War the Soviets focused on building loud, unreliable Submarines, many of which were developed from the German Type XXI, as well as a very very small surface fleet and had a grand total of roughly 713 ships as of the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. And of that 713, 35 were cruisers, 53 were destroyers, 186 were frigates, 171 were corvettes, 268 were submarines, and none were fleet carriers.  

I'm done man, the only Myth here is that the Soviets had a credible, powerful and effective Navy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

No where in any of your previous posts do you alude at all to the Noviks being German Designs. No where, saying "you may read some unpleasant things about the Noviks"

This quote was about the need for the minimum need to understand the subject of the conversation.

10 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

The best destroyers in the world and they were Russian is not admitting that they were technically speaking, not Russian. Nice back peddling.

They were built in Russia and served in the Russian Navy. You don't call Haruna, Kirishima and Hiei English ships, do you?😉

10 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

13 armored cruisers consisting of 5 different classes. Do you really want to bring up the 3 classes of psudo-armored frigates classified as armored cruisers built during the 1870s and 80s that were obsolete upon completion? The General-Admiral class?

And what is wrong? It was about the total for all time. "13 armored cruisers consisting of 5 different classes" were built throughout the history of the Russian Empire. General-Admiral for example, the first in the world armored cruiser.

10 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

The Vladimir Monomakh? The Admiral Nakhimov?

Used as warships. Both were sunk at Tsushima. They were СА and were lost like СА.

10 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

How about how the Rurik, Rossia and Gromoboi were horribly out classed by the British HMS Powerful and HMS Terrible built to counter them?

Technical progress. Between Rurik and Powerful was four years. Add four more years and get Gueydon-class or Drake-class which are much stronger than Powerful.

10 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

Uh, that's uh, kinda why I said..

We are talking about the ships of the Russian fleet. Cruisers Pillau-Klasse have never been a part of IRN.

So far, all that can be seen from your comments is that the last Russian emperor was very fond of buying capital ships from foreigners.

10 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

I see the bait was taken. My apologizes, I was trying to cleanly move away from the trash fire that was the ineffective and impotent soviet navy

What a restrained, objective and balanced assessment 😄 I will remind you that

15 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

It wasn't until Russia became Soviet Russia that their navy switched to almost entirely domestically built warships entirely because everyone hated commies and didn't want to help them 

never happened, since a significant part of the ships of the first generation of the Soviet fleet were built with the help of foreign firms.

10 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

First, you've already proven my point I was making above that the Russians couldn't develop or produce any domestic designs completely on their own.

But we have a domestic designed fleet  in some way 😄 Some even say quite conspicuous. And it doesn't even have foreign-built ships, although we wanted. 

10 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

Project 1, the Leningrad class...they were more a copy of the french Vauquelin

32f91d4872717c74ca86633103b73f22.jpg

l0421_001.jpg

 

00053427.jpg

The two ships in the pictures are clearly look similar. But which ones? Hmm, such a difficult question...

10 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

A propulsion system bought from a land locked country...? Really? Reallllly?

Then suddenly, Brown, Boveri & Cie.

10 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

Thus why over the course of the war the United States supplied the Soviet Union a total of 17,499,861 tons of military equipment, supplies and food the Soviets couldn't produce.

United States had nothing against the sale Union Christie tanks or aircraft engines. Or licenses for a Ford Model AA. As well as entire factories. All this was long before the war. But when it came to ships...

10 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

AHAHAHAH HAHAHA HAHAHA Oh, oh your serious, let me laugh harder! The Soviets, even with american purchased battleship designs and faragut destroyers a "strong navy"? A "threat to the United States"?

And how many aircraft carriers did the soviet union have, ever?

The US Navy ended WW2 with.... 29 battleships, 83 cruisers, 1125 destroyers, 344 submarines, 166 Aircraft Carriers (of all flavors) 

according to lend lease was sent USS Milwaukee (CL-5) and nine destroyers from the First World War. Stalin even wrote a letter to Churchil, something like "send us more modern ships"  and in return received "not enough for us ourselves."

The Yankees shared a lot with the Soviets, but naval technology was not one of that. And yes, if you look at modern fleets, the Russian and Chinese fleets occupy high positions. And America doesn't like China or Russia. Just like they disliked Japan and Great Britain before the WW2. 

10 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

The Sverdlov Class...

Was pre-WW2 design. And like absolutely all cruisers WW2 was "were left dangerously unprotected when operating in areas outside the cover of land-based aircraft". Chapaev was no worse than Brooklyn. It was the first Soviet ship built without construction overload. For comparison, most of the ships of the Russian Empire suffered from this disease to. If not Germans attack the first five cruisers of project 68 would be ready by about 1944.

10 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

And how many Battleships did the soviets build? Because the Imperial Russian Navy build 26. 

And how many did the Imperial Russian Navy nuclear submarines build? Because the soviets build more than a hundred. 😄 The Soviets did not build battleships, because when it made sense the USSR was a poor and ravaged by wars and invasions a country with an economy of Poland  level with an illiterate and starving population.

We don't need a navy. We need more schools (c) Lenin.

And when they could build them, it was clear to everyone except Stalin that they were outdated and unnecessary. One way or another, Stalin died before his "favorite bandit" was completed and this was the end of the history of Soviet battleships.

10 hours ago, Fishyfish said:

I'm done man, the only Myth here is that the Soviets had a credible, powerful and effective Navy. 

You know, I've never said anything like that. The Soviets built some good ships and in the Russian Empire also built good ships sometimes. But I didn't say anything about "credible, powerful and effective Navy".

If you've been trying all this time to tell me that the Red Fleet in WWII sucks, then you've been fighting windmills.

Don_Quixote_fighting_windmills.jpg

The Tsar's Gangut and Svetlana were unsuccessful ships, built according to unsuccessful ideas. Noviks were good, but by WWII they are outdated, just like yankees Flush-deckers. Kirov, Leningrad and 7n were the first new ship generation of the Soviet navy and as always in the case of "we do this for the first time" they had a lot of problems. 

You can look at the problems of the Americans with the Zumwalt, the litioral ships. This is quite typical. Everybody's screwing up. 

The second generation of the Soviet fleet had its drawbacks, but it generally corresponded to world standards. Thanks to Hitler, these ships were built only after the war, when they shot no less than all the other ships of the pre-war projects of any countries.

I personally believe that the place Red Fleet in WWII somewhere close to the French and Italian fleets. Of course, they had more powerful and modern ships than the Soviets, but there was little good in this. The Italians high command the completely devalued the potential power of their fleet. And the most famous events of the French fleet in WWIIt was a massacre, which they staged first by the British, then by the Yankees. The first fleets in the WW2 are British, American and Japanese. The Soviet was not even close. The time of the communists navy came later, during the Cold War.

Edited by TAKTCOM
WAR FOR IMPROVEMENT
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TAKTCOM said:

All of this russian bias, lies, and twisting of words.

Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing.

Edited by Fishyfish
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Fishyfish said:

Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing.

Ah, thank you for this message, full of dignity and courtesy. The words that you used certainly fully show your position on this issue. I believe this is the end of our conversation. Have a nice day!

1618563452_25-krasivosti_pro-p-ulibchiva

Edited by TAKTCOM
WAR FOR IMPROVEMENT
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

hands up if you think the devs are adding stuff to the patch.

fish and eels if you think they aren't.

also i wonder if bones prediction of 3 weeks from announcement will come true.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Cptbarney said:

hands up if you think the devs are adding stuff to the patch.

fish and eels if you think they aren't.

also i wonder if bones prediction of 3 weeks from announcement will come true.

I hope that we will get some more stuffs, because many of us wrote down many important things. 

20210902-141733.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...