Windows World of Warships

[Huntn]

World of Warships, I think similiar to World of Tanks is in Alpha testing. Anyone involved in testing not restricted by a NDA? Here is the FAQ.

I know you get one ship at your command and you will be on a team of ships. I'm just trying to visualize how this will work and wonder if there will be any convenient rocks to hide behind?

Anyone know about naval combat tactics? All I know about is crossing the T. How much more is there? Now imagine a team of 15 ships all running helter skelter...

 

[daffy67]

It is my opinion that along the line they bought the rights to an early warship game called Fighting Steel which i played a lot in late 90's I think it was.
WoW plays almost exactly like it, the interface is very close and of course the graphics are so much better in every way.
WoT has been a money pit for me (but fun), I think warships will eclipse it!!

 

[Huntn]

It is my opinion that along the line they bought the rights to an early warship game called Fighting Steel which i played a lot in late 90's I think it was.
WoW plays almost exactly like it, the interface is very close and of course the graphics are so much better in every way.
WoT has been a money pit for me (but fun), I think warships will eclipse it!!

I'm trying to imagine battleship strategy. Drive up, throw in a zig or a zag and start shoot'n.

 

[PracticalMac]

Same company (also makes World of Warplanes).

Big guns and armor, except cant hid behind a tree.

Play to the strengths of ship, simple.
And game the game flaws.

 

[Huntn]

Same company (also makes World of Warplanes).

Big guns and armor, except cant hid behind a tree.

Play to the strengths of ship, simple.
And game the game flaws.

My son tried World of Warplanes and his impression was that it was a bit arcady. Usually the best give away is the performance of WWII era planes. Can't point them up and go forever. But I can't say they do this in WoW, just got the report of "arcade like". He played Warbirds and Aces High.

 

[quagmire]

That's a really realistic battle formation they have in the promotion video! Having the carriers right next to the dueling battleships!

 

[Huntn]

That's a really realistic battle formation they have in the promotion video! Having the carriers right next to the dueling battleships!

I'm so unsold on the concept, I may not even try it. If there is anyone out there with experience in this type of game, just what is the strategy?

 

[S.B.G]

Looks like an interesting game. Is it one of those kind where you have to pay to play though?

As for strategy, if you're really serious about it, read the book The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors: The Extraordinary World War II Story of the U.S. Navy's Finest Hour.

In there they go into detail of how the US Navy was able to beat the Japanese Navy in the Philippines despite Admiral Halsey's going off on his own and leaving part of the fleet exposed and under supported and out-gunned.

It was a real page-turner for me.

 

[Huntn]

Looks like an interesting game. Is it one of those kind where you have to pay to play though?

As for strategy, if you're really serious about it, read the book The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors: The Extraordinary World War II Story of the U.S. Navy's Finest Hour.

In there they go into detail of how the US Navy was able to beat the Japanese Navy in the Philippines despite Admiral Halsey's going off on his own and leaving part of the fleet exposed and under supported and out-gunned.

It was a real page-turner for me.

I believe it's the same company doing World of Tanks which you can actually play without spending money if you can resist the temptation.

I probably won't read it, but does the book you reference go into specific tactics? When looking at this game, if it's built like WoT, it will be 15 minute battles (or some relative short period of time) on a relatively small arena. I'll have to see if I can dig up some beta battle footage and see if I can make heads or tails of what strategy is applicable.

 

[S.B.G]

I believe it's the same company doing World of Tanks which you can actually play without spending money if you can resist the temptation.

I probably won't read it, but does the book you reference go into specific tactics? When looking at this game, if it's built like WoT, it will be 15 minute battles (or some relative short period of time) on a relatively small arena. I'll have to see if I can dig up some beta battle footage and see if I can make heads or tails of what strategy is applicable.

It wasn't a book of strategy alone, but they did describe how the Tin Can's avoided the Japanese fire (at very close range) and allowed the Flat Tops and destroyers to make a get away which was all strategy and tactics. It was simply brilliant what they did and, I almost forgot, they did it with next to no aerial support either.

 

[quagmire]

I'm so unsold on the concept, I may not even try it. If there is anyone out there with experience in this type of game, just what is the strategy?

It's certainly not having the carriers right next to the battleships as they duked it out. Aircraft carriers are vulnerable ships. The strategy would be for the battleships to go out and attack and leaving the carriers back to provide air support.

I love Battlestations Midway which is a game for PC and Xbox 360. Its similar to this game in that it's a naval strategy game. I always play on a map where I am a battleship. The strategy depends on the map and the goal of the Americans and Japanese. One map the Japanese have to destroy the Americans shipyards and carriers. Americans have to destroy shipyards and airfield. I'm usually Japanese( the game is biased towards the Japanese side). What I do is send one battleship to the shipyards and another out to protect the airfield/create a pincer where the one protecting the airfield cuts off their ships and fires and my other battleship can engage the Americans while progressing to their shipyards.

Once the ships are sunk/shipyards destroyed it is pretty much game over as long as I have decent air support.

That's just for that map. The strategy changes a bit for the other maps I play.

It wasn't a book of strategy alone, but they did describe how the Tin Can's avoided the Japanese fire (at very close range) and allowed the Flat Tops and destroyers to make a get away which was all strategy and tactics. It was simply brilliant what they did and, I almost forgot, they did it with next to no aerial support either.

The Battle of Leyte Gulf was just a horrible joke for the Japanese. Here they had the Yamato in the fleet( Musashi was also part of the fleet, but sunk in an earlier attack) and several other battleships and heavy cruisers. The Japanese successfully lured away Halsey and the carrier group away from the area and the only ships left were destroyer escorts, destroyers, and escort carriers which had the older Wildcats, etc. Nothing that could deal a serious blow to big ships.

So the Japanese northern fleet which included Yamato( there was also a southern fleet as well) encountered Taffy 3. So here you had the most powerful battleship at that time against tin cans and escort carriers. Taffy 3 lead by the USS Johnston charged right in zig zagging going for the splashes of missed shots figuring they wouldn't be aiming for the same spot again and got up close to a heavy cruiser and blew the bow right off with her torps. While the Johnston and other ships were ultimately lost, Yamato( again the most powerful battleship at the time) and the northern fleet turned tail allowing for most of Taffy 3 to escape unharmed and protect the landing troops at Leyte.

Battle 360 does a good job explaining everything. Talks about Leyte at 14:00

 

[S.B.G]

The Battle of Leyte Gulf was just a horrible joke for the Japanese. Here they had the Yamato in the fleet( Musashi was also part of the fleet, but sunk in an earlier attack) and several other battleships and heavy cruisers. The Japanese successfully lured away Halsey and the carrier group away from the area and the only ships left were destroyer escorts, destroyers, and escort carriers which had the older Wildcats, etc. Nothing that could deal a serious blow to big ships.

So the Japanese northern fleet which included Yamato( there was also a southern fleet as well) encountered Taffy 3. So here you had the most powerful battleship at that time against tin cans and escort carriers. Taffy 3 lead by the USS Johnston charged right in zig zagging going for the splashes of missed shots figuring they wouldn't be aiming for the same spot again and got up close to a heavy cruiser and blew the bow right off with her torps. While the Johnston and other ships were ultimately lost, Yamato( again the most powerful battleship at the time) and the northern fleet turned tail allowing for most of Taffy 3 to escape unharmed and protect the landing troops at Leyte.

Battle 360 does a good job explaining everything. Talks about Leyte at 14:00

Yup. It was an awesome battle to read about in that book. Thanks for the YouTube link, I'll give it a look.

 

[Huntn]

It's certainly not having the carriers right next to the battleships as they duked it out. Aircraft carriers are vulnerable ships. The strategy would be for the battleships to go out and attack and leaving the carriers back to provide air support.

I love Battlestations Midway which is a game for PC and Xbox 360. Its similar to this game in that it's a naval strategy game. I always play on a map where I am a battleship. The strategy depends on the map and the goal of the Americans and Japanese. One map the Japanese have to destroy the Americans shipyards and carriers. Americans have to destroy shipyards and airfield. I'm usually Japanese( the game is biased towards the Japanese side). What I do is send one battleship to the shipyards and another out to protect the airfield/create a pincer where the one protecting the airfield cuts off their ships and fires and my other battleship can engage the Americans while progressing to their shipyards.

Once the ships are sunk/shipyards destroyed it is pretty much game over as long as I have decent air support.

That's just for that map. The strategy changes a bit for the other maps I play.



The Battle of Leyte Gulf was just a horrible joke for the Japanese. Here they had the Yamato in the fleet( Musashi was also part of the fleet, but sunk in an earlier attack) and several other battleships and heavy cruisers. The Japanese successfully lured away Halsey and the carrier group away from the area and the only ships left were destroyer escorts, destroyers, and escort carriers which had the older Wildcats, etc. Nothing that could deal a serious blow to big ships.

So the Japanese northern fleet which included Yamato( there was also a southern fleet as well) encountered Taffy 3. So here you had the most powerful battleship at that time against tin cans and escort carriers. Taffy 3 lead by the USS Johnston charged right in zig zagging going for the splashes of missed shots figuring they wouldn't be aiming for the same spot again and got up close to a heavy cruiser and blew the bow right off with her torps. While the Johnston and other ships were ultimately lost, Yamato( again the most powerful battleship at the time) and the northern fleet turned tail allowing for most of Taffy 3 to escape unharmed and protect the landing troops at Leyte.

Battle 360 does a good job explaining everything. Talks about Leyte at 14:00

YouTube: video

Interesting post, thanks! I don't know if you delve into WoT, so I'm wondering how battles will play out in WoWarships and if it develops the same kind of following WoT has. The terrain in WoT and tactics makes the game. I just don't see those same type of split second decisions coming into play when driving ships and the arena is an ocean. I could be totally wrong.

 

[quagmire]

Interesting post, thanks! I don't know if you delve into WoT, so I'm wondering how battles will play out in WoWarships and if it develops the same kind of following WoT has. The terrain in WoT and tactics makes the game. I just don't see those same type of split second decisions coming into play when driving ships and the arena is an ocean. I could be totally wrong.

I haven't payed WoT( not a PC gamer), but strategy/tactics is a huge part in Battlestations Midway. And it requires players to have a mic and actually listen to the overall strategy. It just pisses me off when players don't have mics and/or don't listen to the game plan. I can still win the game on my own( I'm that damn good ), but it makes it harder for me especially if they have a skilled player of their own.

Usually the overall game plan for the Japanese on the map I mentioned is for the airfield to produce nothing, but Zero's with bombs. That gives me the most flexibility in reacting to what the enemy is doing. If the enemy doesn't have any air threats(Dauntless's mostly), the Zero's charge right to the shipyard that produces battleships. Most of the time my teammates take it out if not severely damaging it. Then they switch to air cover taking out any planes they put up. Then for the ships, I launch nothing, but battleships out of my shipyard while my teammate launches either heavy cruisers, a heavy cruiser and a sub, or heavy cruiser and destroyer( depending on what the enemy does).

As mentioned, I split my battleships up to deal with their fleet. I can easily take out their battleships, cruisers, and destroyers with just one of my battleships( I usually have a 3-1 or 4-1 K/D ratio of BB vs BB). If they launched a sub and we don't have a destroyer, I steam my battleships to shallow areas to force the chasing sub to the surface. Once the ships are sunk and shipyards destroyed , I head to the carriers that ran off. While I chase the carriers, I still have my air cover with Zero's shooting down Dauntless's and Avengers( of course which by now the enemy is fully on the defensive).

There are tactics that do absolutely piss me off because I view them as cowardly. One tactic is to range another battleship( for instance the Yamato has a range of 1.8 miles before I can fire at the enemy ship and the opposing New York Class has a range of 1.6 miles before they can engage me). I hate people who range. Going on the ranging is they turn tail and run. While we are both in range, the guy running has the advantage because they are shooting at a target that is moving forward toward the falling shells. Where the chasing ship has to aim at a ship where they are moving away from the shells.

Another tactic I find distasteful is they use land to shield them from our attacks because we can't aim for them, but they can aim and hit us.

It's just cowardly, IMHO. The game is long enough( usually about 15-30 minutes long). These tactics just make it unnecessarily longer. I want to battle a person based on skill, not on how much of a coward you are. Come and engage me and let the better player win. I have played on the American side where the battleships are inferior to the Japanese went straight in and sunk the Japanese battleships and won the game. You just have to know where to aim and how to use the battleships.

/rant

EDIT: Another video about Leyte from Dogfights( of which a lot of the animation came from in Battle 360).

 

[Huntn]

I haven't payed WoT( not a PC gamer), but strategy/tactics is a huge part in Battlestations Midway. And it requires players to have a mic and actually listen to the overall strategy. It just pisses me off when players don't have mics and/or don't listen to the game plan. I can still win the game on my own( I'm that damn good ), but it makes it harder for me especially if they have a skilled player of their own.

Usually the overall game plan for the Japanese on the map I mentioned is for the airfield to produce nothing, but Zero's with bombs. That gives me the most flexibility in reacting to what the enemy is doing. If the enemy doesn't have any air threats(Dauntless's mostly), the Zero's charge right to the shipyard that produces battleships. Most of the time my teammates take it out if not severely damaging it. Then they switch to air cover taking out any planes they put up. Then for the ships, I launch nothing, but battleships out of my shipyard while my teammate launches either heavy cruisers, a heavy cruiser and a sub, or heavy cruiser and destroyer( depending on what the enemy does).

As mentioned, I split my battleships up to deal with their fleet. I can easily take out their battleships, cruisers, and destroyers with just one of my battleships( I usually have a 3-1 or 4-1 K/D ratio of BB vs BB). If they launched a sub and we don't have a destroyer, I steam my battleships to shallow areas to force the chasing sub to the surface. Once the ships are sunk and shipyards destroyed , I head to the carriers that ran off. While I chase the carriers, I still have my air cover with Zero's shooting down Dauntless's and Avengers( of course which by now the enemy is fully on the defensive).

There are tactics that do absolutely piss me off because I view them as cowardly. One tactic is to range another battleship( for instance the Yamato has a range of 1.8 miles before I can fire at the enemy ship and the opposing New York Class has a range of 1.6 miles before they can engage me). I hate people who range. Going on the ranging is they turn tail and run. While we are both in range, the guy running has the advantage because they are shooting at a target that is moving forward toward the falling shells. Where the chasing ship has to aim at a ship where they are moving away from the shells.

Another tactic I find distasteful is they use land to shield them from our attacks because we can't aim for them, but they can aim and hit us.

It's just cowardly, IMHO. The game is long enough( usually about 15-30 minutes long). These tactics just make it unnecessarily longer. I want to battle a person based on skill, not on how much of a coward you are. Come and engage me and let the better player win. I have played on the American side where the battleships are inferior to the Japanese went straight in and sunk the Japanese battleships and won the game. You just have to know where to aim and how to use the battleships.

/rant

EDIT: Another video about Leyte from Dogfights( of which a lot of the animation came from in Battle 360).

YouTube: video

I'm not making fun of you, but that's a little funny when I hear someone in Wot text something like "you cheated, you shot in the back" or "you shot me from between 2 rocks, come out and face me like a man". I just giggle when I read that. Obviously whatever the tactic, the person whining is dead. This is war. There are no rules especially an imagined requirement for a fair fight, lol.

 

[quagmire]

I'm not making fun of you, but that's a little funny when I hear someone in Wot text something like "you cheated, you shot in the back" or "you shot me from between 2 rocks, come out and face me like a man". I just giggle when I read that. Obviously whatever the tactic, the person whining is dead. This is war. There are no rules especially an imagined requirement for a fair fight, lol.

The people who do complain about being shot in the back are ridiculous. Hell, you should hear the people in COD: MW2 when I ran around just using the tactical knife and knife people. They complain when they are the ones that have the advantage in they can use a gun where I have to get close to them to stab them. And I wasn't camping in the corner hiding for them to pass me and stab them in the back. I would run around the map and run right at them even when they were facing me and shooting me and I would still manage to get up close to stab them.

But if I was shooting them in the back and they complain about it, I go, " What should I do? message you saying I'm behind you?"

But, that is a quick pace game. Since Midway is slow paced and it takes awhile to get in range of each other, etc I just want to see who is better, etc. If I see people who range, hide behind land, etc I disengage and we start a standoff. They can run or hide all they want. I will not enter their range thus making the game last hours if they want it to. There are a lot of other tactics they can use that I have successfully used to win that are not cowardly. They just choose the cowardly one because they suck at the game even if they have the superior battleship( again Yamato vs WWI era New York class battleships).

On some maps I can negate them hiding behind land by going the long way around the island. But, that just adds another 10-15 minutes to the game because it takes awhile for these huge battleships going 20-25 knots to go around it.

 

[daffy67]

Given the type of player in WoT has the brain of a pea I figure they will just dumb warships down to appeal to the mass market gamer as playing battleships with any kind of tactics, strategy or realism is absolutely beyond most peoples grasp (ex serving sailor here myself).
I know we can't expect it to be a simulator as it would not appeal or sell enough if it is too difficult to play.