Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Personally, it's the first "World of ... " I'm excited for.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/01/27 13:23:16
"Fear is freedom! Subjugation is liberation! Contradiction is truth! These are the truths of this world! Surrender to these truths, you pigs in human clothing!" - Satsuki Kiryuin, Kill la Kill
An aircraft carrier should never, ever be that close to the enemy ships. In fact nearly no ship should be that close to another ship.
Hopefully like the aircraft and tanks warthunder can do it better.
Are you saying warships cannot ram?
While it wasn't used as a tactic, if an Essex class aircraft carrier rammed a japanese destroyer that destroyer would not be a happy vessel. Its better to have it in just in case, as you can clearly see in the video you won't have many chances to do it.
I've converted to almost 100% warthunder but I'll give it a go.
An aircraft carrier should never, ever be that close to the enemy ships. In fact nearly no ship should be that close to another ship.
Hopefully like the aircraft and tanks warthunder can do it better.
Are you saying warships cannot ram?
While it wasn't used as a tactic, if an Essex class aircraft carrier rammed a japanese destroyer that destroyer would not be a happy vessel. Its better to have it in just in case, as you can clearly see in the video you won't have many chances to do it.
I've converted to almost 100% warthunder but I'll give it a go.
Naval vessels should not ram. No sane person would use a ship of extreme importance to ram another ship.
Do you know expensive it is to build an aircraft carrier? OR even a smaller vessel? Both ships would be very messed up, but most admirals would be sacked if those ships before they even got close.
Tanks rammed each other, planes rammed each other, but ships have not rammed each other for a very ling time. Both ships should get very badly messed up for ramming.
Personally this puts me off. Just personal taste really.
An aircraft carrier should never, ever be that close to the enemy ships. In fact nearly no ship should be that close to another ship.
Hopefully like the aircraft and tanks warthunder can do it better.
Are you saying warships cannot ram?
While it wasn't used as a tactic, if an Essex class aircraft carrier rammed a japanese destroyer that destroyer would not be a happy vessel. Its better to have it in just in case, as you can clearly see in the video you won't have many chances to do it.
I've converted to almost 100% warthunder but I'll give it a go.
Naval vessels should not ram. No sane person would use a ship of extreme importance to ram another ship.
Do you know expensive it is to build an aircraft carrier? OR even a smaller vessel? Both ships would be very messed up, but most admirals would be sacked if those ships before they even got close.
Tanks rammed each other, planes rammed each other, but ships have not rammed each other for a very ling time. Both ships should get very badly messed up for ramming.
Personally this puts me off. Just personal taste really.
Okay. But, these ships are player controlled in very much and Arcade style game. Would you rather have them just clip through each other? Or impact without any damage?
An aircraft carrier should never, ever be that close to the enemy ships. In fact nearly no ship should be that close to another ship.
Hopefully like the aircraft and tanks warthunder can do it better.
Are you saying warships cannot ram?
While it wasn't used as a tactic, if an Essex class aircraft carrier rammed a japanese destroyer that destroyer would not be a happy vessel. Its better to have it in just in case, as you can clearly see in the video you won't have many chances to do it.
I've converted to almost 100% warthunder but I'll give it a go.
Naval vessels should not ram. No sane person would use a ship of extreme importance to ram another ship.
Do you know expensive it is to build an aircraft carrier? OR even a smaller vessel? Both ships would be very messed up, but most admirals would be sacked if those ships before they even got close.
Tanks rammed each other, planes rammed each other, but ships have not rammed each other for a very ling time. Both ships should get very badly messed up for ramming.
Personally this puts me off. Just personal taste really.
Okay. But, these ships are player controlled in very much and Arcade style game. Would you rather have them just clip through each other? Or impact without any damage?
No I think both ships should suffer terribly for it. The incentive to ram should be nil.
An aircraft carrier should never, ever be that close to the enemy ships. In fact nearly no ship should be that close to another ship.
Hopefully like the aircraft and tanks warthunder can do it better.
Are you saying warships cannot ram?
While it wasn't used as a tactic, if an Essex class aircraft carrier rammed a japanese destroyer that destroyer would not be a happy vessel. Its better to have it in just in case, as you can clearly see in the video you won't have many chances to do it.
I've converted to almost 100% warthunder but I'll give it a go.
Naval vessels should not ram. No sane person would use a ship of extreme importance to ram another ship.
Do you know expensive it is to build an aircraft carrier? OR even a smaller vessel? Both ships would be very messed up, but most admirals would be sacked if those ships before they even got close.
Tanks rammed each other, planes rammed each other, but ships have not rammed each other for a very ling time. Both ships should get very badly messed up for ramming.
Personally this puts me off. Just personal taste really.
Essex Class Aircraft Carrier- 36 000 long tons, equivalent to smallish battleships
Fubuki Class destroyer- 2000 long tons
Ramming has been done several times in naval history, it was encouraged for a time as a valid anti-submarine tactic by the royal navy. In fact the only time a battleship sunk a submarine was when HMS Dreadnought rammed one during ww1, cut the u-boat clean in half for no damage.
Warships are durable, I assure you, the can ram.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/01/27 22:52:38
In World War II, naval ships often rammed other vessels, though this was often due to circumstances, as considerable damage could be caused to the attacking ship. The damage that lightly constructed destroyers took from the tactic led to it being officially discouraged by the Royal Navy from early 1943, after the HMS Hesperus was dry-docked for three months following sinking U-357 in December 1942 and HMS Harvester was torpedoed and sunk following damaging her propellers during the ramming of U-444 in March 1943. USS Buckley rammed U-66; and HMS Easton rammed U-458.
Not recommended. A few outliers does not mean it should be common. Remember if you ram a ship, its gonna grind along the sides and or undersides of your ship, which is valuable. Let along the impact that may damage your ship.
Im not saying ramming cant happen, but it doesnt happen in the sense that ships should ram and destroy other ships. Both ships are likely to be damaged costing millions to get them sent back and repaired for little to no gain.
Anyway, there is no convincing me ramming is a viable tactic. As I said if you enjoy using your aircraft carriers to ram destroyers, go ahead. But I personally find the fact that the two ships are even close in the first place horrible in a naval game.
But I get it. Its arcade.
Also ramming subs and U boats is not the same at all to ramming destroyers and other armoured warships. Especially in the early 1900s.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/01/27 23:00:29
In World War II, naval ships often rammed other vessels, though this was often due to circumstances, as considerable damage could be caused to the attacking ship. The damage that lightly constructed destroyers took from the tactic led to it being officially discouraged by the Royal Navy from early 1943, after the HMS Hesperus was dry-docked for three months following sinking U-357 in December 1942 and HMS Harvester was torpedoed and sunk following damaging her propellers during the ramming of U-444 in March 1943. USS Buckley rammed U-66; and HMS Easton rammed U-458.
Not recommended. A few outliers does not mean it should be common. Remember if you ram a ship, its gonna grind along the sides and or undersides of your ship, which is valuable. Let along the impact that may damage your ship.
Im not saying ramming cant happen, but it doesnt happen in the sense that ships should ram and destroy other ships. Both ships are likely to be damaged costing millions to get them sent back and repaired for little to no gain.
Anyway, there is no convincing me ramming is a viable tactic. As I said if you enjoy using your aircraft carriers to ram destroyers, go ahead. But I personally find the fact that the two ships are even close in the first place horrible in a naval game.
But I get it. Its arcade.
I'm not saying it should be a viable tactic but if it does happen an aircraft carrier weighs 18 time as much as a destroyer, what do you think is going to happen? The carrier won't much care to be perfectly honest. Its important for it to be in the game and looks good in a trailer.
Since we're quoting wikipedia, let me quote you some wikipedia
Ironically for a vessel designed to engage enemy battleships, her only significant action was the ramming and sinking of German submarine SM U-29, skippered by K/Lt Otto Weddigen (of SM U-9 fame), on 18 March 1915. U-29 had broken the surface immediately ahead of Dreadnought after firing a torpedo at HMS Neptune and Dreadnought cut the submarine in two after a short chase. She almost collided with HMS Temeraire who was also attempting to ram. Dreadnought thus became the only battleship ever to sink a submarine
During anti-submarine action, ramming was an alternative if the destroyer was too close to the surfaced submarine for her main guns to fire into the water. The tactic was used by the famous British anti-submarine specialist Captain Frederic John Walker from December 1941 to the end of the war.
Lt. Commander Gerard Roope, the captain of HMS Glowworm, was posthumously awarded the Victoria Cross for the 1940 ramming of the German cruiser Admiral Hipper following a close-range action in bad weather off the Norwegian coast. More recent claims suggest that the Hipper was actually attempting to ram the Glowworm and the two ships simply collided.
The bold parts indicate that ramming was a tactic often considered by captains. If a ship is damaged then yes it will take time an money to repair, but if a ship is dead its dead, sunk, on the bottom of the sea, out of the fight. If you can suffer some damage to permanently put a ship out of action its a good trade. Ships take years and millions of dollars to build, sinking one is almost always worth it, even if you do take some damage.
Yea but as I said they are outliers. Normally by circumstance.
You are twisting the evidence to suggest ramming was a viable tactic all the time.
Ramming a submarine is different, still risky but a dent in a submarine will kill it/render it useless. A dent in a warship can be solved.
Viable tactic doesnt mean a good one, just one that can work. Its viable for me to kill someone with my bare fists, but if I can use something different I will, like a base ball bat.
Its viable for me to ram a sub if I cant use my guns or have no other options. Its not viable for me to go out of my way to ram a destroyer with an aircraft carrier.
Ramming in a warship will 99% of the time result in a loss of your job I assure you. Ramming a sub is stupid, but if you have to do it then yes it has more chance of working.
In short, its still dumb as hell and is not frequent enough to allow ramming as a powerful tool (as indicated by the trailer).
As I said even the fact and aircraft carrier is close enough to ram another ship is bonkers as it is.
The large vessel may care if you ruin its propellers, rudder or even remotely damage the hull. Yes I do think an aircraft carrier will care if its ramming destroyers. Especially given how expensive and valuable they are.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/01/27 23:25:06
I think we are arguing at cross purposes here. First of all, the ramming is just in the trailer, if you watch the gameplay at no point does anyone try to ram and even get remotely close enough to ram another ship.
Second, we're kind of saying the same thing, but with a different point of view. My point is, its something you do if you're too close to use your guns, and believe me, if you can sink an enemy vessel, its worth it. Ships go into repair all the time, if you're in a battle at all and are close enough to consider ramming, you've probably taken shell fire and will have to repair anyway, if you can sink an enemy ship its worth it.
The thing is warships of the early 20th century are very tough, look at all the firepower it took to sink the Bismarck. Most naval battles result in very few loses, mostly just gunfire for a bit, one side runs away, everyone goes into repairs for a while. If, by ramming a vessel, a captain sinks an enemy vessel he'll probably be commended in some way because he sank an enemy vessel.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/01/27 23:46:15
EmilCrane wrote: I think we are arguing at cross purposes here. First of all, the ramming is just in the trailer, if you watch the gameplay at no point does anyone try to ram and even get remotely close enough to ram another ship.
Yes I know, but as (at least as I thought I said) the fact that ramming like that is a thing put me off instantly. 2 ships shouldn't ram. Submarines are different of course as seen in the evidence. Thats all that put me off. The ramming of an aircraft carrier into another ship spells out the game play to me.
I can grantee in that trailer it will show broadsiding battle ships for example, in fact ill watch past the ramming and see if my initial assumptions on the game are correct. (ok, seconds later this happened) I will watch no more.
But for me it spelled the nature of the game personally.
Yea I know, even ironclads were hard to sink, hence why ramming was used then. But for an aircraft carrier, the point im stressing here, to ram an enemy ship is unthinkable, and then for a warship to ram a warship is again not normal or in any way common.
Hence why aircraft carriers and submarines are vital to naval warfare, they can blow up vessels like no other ship can.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/01/27 23:54:34
Just ignore that stuff at the beginning and watch the real gameplay. I have a history degree, I did my dissertation in naval history, I know what real naval battles look like, and while no arcade game can come close, World of Warships does an ok job. The real gameplay, not that crap at the beginning.
EmilCrane wrote: Just ignore that stuff at the beginning and watch the real gameplay. I have a history degree, I did my dissertation in naval history, I know what real naval battles look like, and while no arcade game can come close, World of Warships does an ok job. The real gameplay, not that crap at the beginning.
Would have been better to say this at the beginning
I might give it a watch, but when im home with sound maybe.
An aircraft carrier should never, ever be that close to the enemy ships. In fact nearly no ship should be that close to another ship.
Hopefully like the aircraft and tanks warthunder can do it better.
Are you saying warships cannot ram?
While it wasn't used as a tactic, if an Essex class aircraft carrier rammed a japanese destroyer that destroyer would not be a happy vessel. Its better to have it in just in case, as you can clearly see in the video you won't have many chances to do it.
I've converted to almost 100% warthunder but I'll give it a go.
Naval vessels should not ram. No sane person would use a ship of extreme importance to ram another ship.
Do you know expensive it is to build an aircraft carrier? OR even a smaller vessel? Both ships would be very messed up, but most admirals would be sacked if those ships before they even got close.
Tanks rammed each other, planes rammed each other, but ships have not rammed each other for a very ling time. Both ships should get very badly messed up for ramming.
Personally this puts me off. Just personal taste really.
Clearly, this reveals something is severely lacking from both this game and RL naval combat.
Battering rams.
Someone go and petition the US Navy and the makers of this game to add battering rams to modern ships. Modern navy guys are all weaklings, cowardly killing before they can even look each other in the eye! It is obvious modern warships have great need of battering rams. Also boarding actions.
EmilCrane wrote: I think we are arguing at cross purposes here. First of all, the ramming is just in the trailer, if you watch the gameplay at no point does anyone try to ram and even get remotely close enough to ram another ship.
Yes I know, but as (at least as I thought I said) the fact that ramming like that is a thing put me off instantly. 2 ships shouldn't ram. Submarines are different of course as seen in the evidence. Thats all that put me off. The ramming of an aircraft carrier into another ship spells out the game play to me.
I can grantee in that trailer it will show broadsiding battle ships for example, in fact ill watch past the ramming and see if my initial assumptions on the game are correct. (ok, seconds later this happened) I will watch no more.
But for me it spelled the nature of the game personally.
Yea I know, even ironclads were hard to sink, hence why ramming was used then. But for an aircraft carrier, the point im stressing here, to ram an enemy ship is unthinkable, and then for a warship to ram a warship is again not normal or in any way common.
Hence why aircraft carriers and submarines are vital to naval warfare, they can blow up vessels like no other ship can.
So... you are dismissing an entire game on the basis of about 3 seconds of gameplay? Recorded as a highlight, not something typical. Also, to play a bit of devil's advocate. Just because it never happened in reality doesn't mean it's something impossible.
EmilCrane wrote: I think we are arguing at cross purposes here. First of all, the ramming is just in the trailer, if you watch the gameplay at no point does anyone try to ram and even get remotely close enough to ram another ship.
Yes I know, but as (at least as I thought I said) the fact that ramming like that is a thing put me off instantly. 2 ships shouldn't ram. Submarines are different of course as seen in the evidence. Thats all that put me off. The ramming of an aircraft carrier into another ship spells out the game play to me.
I can grantee in that trailer it will show broadsiding battle ships for example, in fact ill watch past the ramming and see if my initial assumptions on the game are correct. (ok, seconds later this happened) I will watch no more.
But for me it spelled the nature of the game personally.
Yea I know, even ironclads were hard to sink, hence why ramming was used then. But for an aircraft carrier, the point im stressing here, to ram an enemy ship is unthinkable, and then for a warship to ram a warship is again not normal or in any way common.
Hence why aircraft carriers and submarines are vital to naval warfare, they can blow up vessels like no other ship can.
So... you are dismissing an entire game on the basis of about 3 seconds of gameplay? Recorded as a highlight, not something typical. Also, to play a bit of devil's advocate. Just because it never happened in reality doesn't mean it's something impossible.
Yes pretty much.
I am very picky with video games. Its a curse as any outsider can see. But its something I have to live with when it comes to choosing books, movies and games.
If it runs on a mac, I'll be in. Also this thread title needs more nautical jargon- seamen say Aye, not Yay!
Spoiler:
Don't get port behind, lubbers!
Klawz-Ramming is a subset of citrus fruit?
Gwar- "And everyone wants a bigger Spleen!"
Mercurial wrote:
I admire your aplomb and instate you as Baron of the Seas and Lord Marshall of Privateers.
Orkeosaurus wrote:Star Trek also said we'd have X-Wings by now. We all see how that prediction turned out.
Orkeosaurus, on homophobia, the nature of homosexuality, and the greatness of George Takei.
English doesn't borrow from other languages. It follows them down dark alleyways and mugs them for loose grammar.
EmilCrane wrote: Just ignore that stuff at the beginning and watch the real gameplay. I have a history degree, I did my dissertation in naval history, I know what real naval battles look like, and while no arcade game can come close, World of Warships does an ok job. The real gameplay, not that crap at the beginning.
Would have been better to say this at the beginning
I might give it a watch, but when im home with sound maybe.
Give it a try, the guy commenting knows his stuff and is very informative and fun to listen to. Just try to survive the initial seconds that are never again showed
"Fear is freedom! Subjugation is liberation! Contradiction is truth! These are the truths of this world! Surrender to these truths, you pigs in human clothing!" - Satsuki Kiryuin, Kill la Kill
Managed to get a Closed Beta spot too. I'll probably try during the weekend.
"Fear is freedom! Subjugation is liberation! Contradiction is truth! These are the truths of this world! Surrender to these truths, you pigs in human clothing!" - Satsuki Kiryuin, Kill la Kill
Sadly, didn't get on the EU one, so I'm hanging out in the NA closed beta. Just tried out a couple romps in a Japanese destroyer. Torpedo's are hilarious and at good breaking ships in two.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/03/12 22:19:50
