World of Battleships Laid Down

[Andy Chalk]

World of Battleships Laid Down

Wargaming.net is gearing up to complete the land-sea-air trifecta with World of Battleships, an upcoming MMO that will put players in the captain's chairs of the most powerful warships to ever put to sea.

Hot on the heels of the World of Warplanes announcement [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/112156-World-of-Warplanes-Website-Takes-to-the-Skies] comes word of the third game in what has very quickly become a trilogy: World of Battleships, a free-to-play naval MMO based around the battleship era of the 20th century. The new game will offer a "large assortment" of warships, each with its own combination of firepower, speed, armor and toughness, prowling realistic maps with variable weather conditions. Players will also be able to take advantage of a "common economic system" that will allow them to distribute resources between the three games at will.

World of Battleships follows behind the already-live World of Tanks [http://www.worldoftanks.com/] and the aforementioned World of Warplanes, but while Tanks appears to be doing well and I have a personal jones for Warplanes, I'm not really sure what to expect from Battleships. Second World War-era fighters are a natural fit for one-on-one online combat and tanks are close enough, but battleships are a whole different story. The HMS King George V had a crew of more than 1600 guys and it's hard to imagine putting all that into the hands of a single player without either gutting the experience or requiring an interface so painfully complex as to drive away all but the most hardcore sim freaks.

No word on when World of Battleships will be playable, even in beta state, but I'll definitely be keeping an eye on it. In the meantime, you can find out more about the "World of" games at wargaming.net [http://www.wargaming.net/].


Permalink

 

[Elementlmage]

That is one sexy looking Ise. Also, I like the idea of "common resources." It will encourage people to play the other games in the series and ease entry into them if a person say, kicks ass at WoWPlanes, but can't get the hang of WoT or WOB.

But, the real question is, will this replace Navyfield?

 

[rickynumber24]

I'll be honest, I slow clapped when I read this article.

This was precisely the game I wanted ever since I played world of tanks.

Thank you Wargaming.net. Thank you so much. Now I am tearing up.

Man, next thing you're going to tell is that there's a World of Mechs coming up...

...

*waits patiently*

You might want to look into the already-existing competition to World of Battleships called NavyField. Admittedly, it doesn't do weather effects or have the graphics shown in that promotional shot... but it was pretty serviceable when I played it. (It also hits a lot of the "Korean MMO" checkboxes, including a subscription which you need to pay if you're going to advance your crew at a rate faster than a snail's pace.) But yeah, it could definitely work.

World of Mechs... I'd totally play that, as long as it offered at least Mechwarrior/Battletech grade customization and detail.

 

[Throwitawaynow]

Tell me when they combine them in to an airplane, battleship, tank game with overarching narrative.

 

[evilneko]

That's it, NavyField was the game I was trying to remember. I tried it, but never could get into it though. I hope WoB turns out better.

 

[Furioso]

I'll be honest, I slow clapped when I read this article.

This was precisely the game I wanted ever since I played world of tanks.

Thank you Wargaming.net. Thank you so much. Now I am tearing up.

Man, next thing you're going to tell is that there's a World of Mechs coming up...

...

*waits patiently*

Stole the words from my mouth... or fingers, this is exactly the kind of game I have wanted since I discovered the joy of naval combat

 

[Hashbrick]

I for one wish they would just combine them all.

Spoiler

Whose ready for World of BattleWarTankPlanes!?!

 

[DaHero]

I for one wish they would just combine them all.

Spoiler

Whose ready for World of BattleWarTankPlanes!?!

Couldn't they just say World of War?

Oh wai-*shot*

Although: NavyField has a strong Macbook following, so unless these games are mac compatible...it's tricky.

 

[Squilookle]

Tell me when they combine them in to an airplane, battleship, tank game with overarching narrative.

All we need is for the next Battlestations game to include tank combat, and this whole trilogy get's rendered redundant.

 

[Asehujiko]

Ise

I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of me having a sane tower layout and pointing all my guns in the right direction without presenting a huge broadside.

 

[Elementlmage]

Ise

I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of me having a sane tower layout and pointing all my guns in the right direction without presenting a huge broadside.

Oh, I'm sorry, I CAN hear you over the sound of your quads jamming!

What? I can't hear you over is the sound of 9 barrels launching 12 tons of American RDX fury!

 

[Asehujiko]

Ise

I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of me having a sane tower layout and pointing all my guns in the right direction without presenting a huge broadside.

Oh, I'm sorry, I CAN hear you over the sound of your quads jamming!

What? I can't hear you over is the sound of 9 barrels launching 12 tons of American RDX fury!

Again, both your firepower/tonnage and firepower/amount of ship presented to enemy ratios are lacking and firing sideways has never been good for accuracy.

 

[Elementlmage]

Ise

I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of me having a sane tower layout and pointing all my guns in the right direction without presenting a huge broadside.

Oh, I'm sorry, I CAN hear you over the sound of your quads jamming!

What? I can't hear you over is the sound of 9 barrels launching 12 tons of American RDX fury!

Again, both your firepower/tonnage and firepower/amount of ship presented to enemy ratios are lacking and firing sideways has never been good for accuracy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16%22/50_caliber_Mark_7_gun

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/330mm/50_Mod%C3%A8le_1931_gun

Iowa broadside-tonnage ratio= 2700*9/52000=~0.467

"The guns of the half turrets were so close, that a wake effect between shells fired simultaneously by a half turret was leading to an excessive dispersal,[28] which has not been corrected before 1948 on the Richelieu class battleships.[29]"-Strasbourg

Here's a fun table:

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_16-50_mk7.htm

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNFR_13-50_m1931.htm

Scroll down to "Armor Penetration"

The Iowa out ranges(as a function of armor penatration-armor protection) and out penetrates the Stras...

3-0

We can't really compare accuracy, as there is no hard accuracy figures for the Strabourg. However, the Iowa Class was the first and only series of battle ships to be fitted with Radar based FCS, making it's range finding ability FAR greater than that of ships which still used stereoscopic rangefinders like the Dunkerque Class that were off by around 175m at 20km, were as the Iowas range-finding inaccuracy could be measured in inches!

What is really interesting is that both ships AP shells have fairly similar angles of impact at 30km, however, I am having a ***** of a time trying to find the Dunkerque Class BBs height (Iowa's is 173' from the water line), so it is impossible to compare "combat radius," i.e. the adjusted height and width of the ship when compared to angle of impact, the higher the angle, the lower the radius.

-Edit-

Actually, firing sideways is very good for accuracy as all of the guns have the exact same range to the target, so there is no need to input multiple range values or adjust individual gun elevation. It is also just as stable a platform as firing guns forward as there is no credence to the popular myth that ships roll excessively (or at all really) when firing broadsides.

 

[Sansha]

I'm excited for this. I want something relatively small, but still badass. The Nagato class stands out in my mind.