I saw how little a shit twitter was giving over these new ships and thought maybe the corona was to blame. Then I saw they're just Eagle Union ships and understood why these most of these new ships couldn't even hit 15k likes. Meanwhile in Russia, 5 ships over 15k and the hype is still going. Even worse is they're wasting the costumes this event on stupid Olympics themed clothing, lol. Batch was somehow more important than the actual ships that are in this event. This game fucking hates the Eagle Union and I can't help but laugh. Try and refute that fact.
Please get sick so we don't have to see your comments anymore.
I saw how little a shit twitter was giving over these new ships and thought maybe the corona was to blame. Then I saw they're just Eagle Union ships and understood why these most of these new ships couldn't even hit 15k likes. Meanwhile in Russia, 5 ships over 15k and the hype is still going. Even worse is they're wasting the costumes this event on stupid Olympics themed clothing, lol. Batch was somehow more important than the actual ships that are in this event. This game fucking hates the Eagle Union and I can't help but laugh. Try and refute that fact.
Bruh, I hadn't seen you in a minute and was really hoping you fucked off and died.
4 main turret? ..maybe i should read wiki about her info
according to her wiki page, she was armed with 9 × 8"/55 caliber guns, or in order words, 3 x triple 203mm. So I don't know where the idea that she had 4 main turrets came from.
according to her wiki page, she was armed with 9 × 8"/55 caliber guns, or in order words, 3 x triple 203mm. So I don't know where the idea that she had 4 main turrets came from.
Could be rule of cool, or the artist just didn’t do enough research. Remember that not everybody can be as detailed and look to historical attention like Shibafu.
The question now is; whether to overlook that or not.
Keo said: The question now is; whether to overlook that or not.
What would be the point of fixating on it? "But that depiction with more than three turrets is wrong, it's not like the real counterpart!"
Well, yes, right? Being a scantily clad girl with huge boobs as the core concept already threw all "realistic representation" away from the get go, didn't it?
I'd see a point in complaining about correct representation in World of Warships, maybe...
I mean, it depends on your standards of what you can consider good design and various from person to person, as well as how important you see it.
For me, there are times when I see something from what I like, the design being a sort of personifications or something to another, and when I see the design they chose making or even having absolutely no sense whatsoever to what it was based on, I get really fucking pissed. It just tells me the artist(or the people in charge who accepted it) was being a lazy piece of shit who didnt even give half a fuck about what he was suppose to be drawing. If the character they drew could easily be just given another name and represent something else without any problem, I will call it a steaming pile of shit, no matter how good it looks.
This happens alot for me in FGO, but it is still just my opinion.
On the otherhand, I love it when the artist took consideration and effort to add subtle details and even trivial accuracy. It shows me that they really took time to understand and put their all into the design, rather than just shitting something out.
But once again, that is just me. I don’t know all the behind the scene debacle of whatever nor do I care. It’s just how I feel sometimes. It is the little things that make the biggest impact.
Sigfried666 said:
I'd see a point in complaining about correct representation in World of Warships, maybe...
But technically speaking, she is suppose to represent the said warship. Why should there not be accuracy and standards, even if she is a scantly clad girl girl? Judging from her stats, she’s an SSR rank as well so it means that she has a value.
I understand it might not really matter in the long run but she’s going to be something of a desire so shouldn’t it be good to at least... Idk, not have mistakes that will be notable?
I don’t think it’s right to give leeway to something on the bases of just because it isn’t going to be realistic or whatever due to lack of research or effort. If there was an actual reason or something, or it just being “cool”, then maybe..but really, not so much.
The question now is; whether to overlook that or not.
There's a chance to get it fixed as long enough players care to point the mistake out.
Judging from the usual symmetrical split hull rigging, this was designed indeed with 2 turrets each. Just delete the one barely visible on the right side (the one almost covered by her right arm) and bear with the resulting asymmetry.
Could be rule of cool, or the artist just didn’t do enough research. Remember that not everybody can be as detailed and look to historical attention like Shibafu.
The question now is; whether to overlook that or not.
I think this was mentioned somewhere before but I'm pretty sure a lot of the AL artists don't draw/design the rigging. I believe it's some in house artist.
And I wonder what would be the standard for the allowed/denied leeway. Like, if we need to have a historically correct number of turrets and all else, should we also have proportional height and weight? Are we using the correct equipment? Should Sakura Empire carriers be allowed to launch Eagle Union's aircraft? Were all battleships able to use AP or HI ammo?
I'm not a military/navy buff, so I'll admit I have no special love for the actual ships. So maybe it's simply something that doesn't matter TO ME, and as such, I don't really see the importance.
Now, for this design, specificallu, I think there are 4 turrets to keep the design symetrical. That's more pleasing to the eyes.
Frawnkenstein said: Just delete the one barely visible on the right side (the one almost covered by her right arm) and bear with the resulting asymmetry.
The assymetry would be very annoying to me, but still, the back turret on her right side is almost totally hidden from view in the portrait art, so maybe it hardly matters in the end.
personally I think the important thing is not whether the design should be more historically accurate or aesthetically pleasing, but how consistent they are with their rigging design principles.
if we look at previous ship designs like Rodney or even Bremerton's sister Baltimore, they have asymmetrical rigging, so it sets the expectation that AL is more concerned with historical accuracy in their rigging design.
Bremerton runs contrary to that so it leaves us confused whether we should expect AL rigging to be accurate or expect AL to take more artistic liberties in their rigging design in future.
Yeah, probably better to overlook it since it's pretty much that everytime it's an Eagle Union ship isn't it?
The other factions seems to have at least a little accuracy and research made for them but the Eagle Union ships, "you just cram things without thinking about it so we could have a ship for the faction" kind of mind set isn't it?
No? Where did you even get that idea? I've only heard of a handful of ships that actually have some noteworthy mistake in their rigging, and it's certainly not a common Eagle Union thing.
Just joking here, don't take it too seriously but...
You guys are the reason why Kiyoshimo can never become a battleship! Because "it's not a realistic representation", "you can't create original units", "that's too much artistic freedom" and all else! Shame on you!
But back on my pointless ranting...
persocom01 said: ...it leaves us confused whether we should expect AL rigging to be accurate or expect AL to take more artistic liberties in their rigging design in future.
Like I said before, I am not a ship buff, I'm here for the cute, sexy and/or moe girls. So I kinda sometimes (most of times) don't really pay attention to their riggings unless they really draw my attention. The characters extra skins remove the riggings altogether.
But I'm not incapable of empathy, I had more time to mull things around and there ARE things I like. I think I can kinda relate. For example, let's say, if a moe personification of a videogame console uses the worng kind of midia or has a wrong controller design, it would really irritate me.
So, on one point, I can understand when people say that the incorrect representation of the real warship annoys them. I guess Bremerton having one less turret wouldn't damage her design that much.
But I kinda dislike the idea of chaining the artists to perfectly correct representations. People might start exagerating. If we extrapolate from there, for example, we would have to remove the beast-like appendages of the Ironblood and Northern Parliament factions, since they don't seem to represent any proper warship function.
...But I kinda dislike the idea of chaining the artists to perfectly correct representations. People might start exagerating. If we extrapolate from there, for example, we would have to remove the beast-like appendages of the Ironblood and Northern Parliament factions, since they don't seem to represent any proper warship function.
I said that I'm more concerned with consistency. Why be accurate elsewhere and inaccurate here? If some ironblood ships had beast-like appendages and some didn't, I'm more concerned with why not all of them have it than whether they should have it or not.
I will disagree with the idea that artists shouldn't be bound by accurate historical representation of ships, because there are many other games out there that aren't don't have historical material to base their characters on, and such as league of angels or something, and nobody cares about their character details since nobody knows what an angel looks like. But when you market yourself as a anthropomorphized ww2(?) warship game, people have the expectation that many of the attributes of the resulting character designs have some real life historical basis.
I said that I'm more concerned with consistency. Why be accurate elsewhere and inaccurate here? If some ironblood ships had beast-like appendages and some didn't, I'm more concerned with why not all of them have it than whether they should have it or not.
And that does raise a point in case of the Northern Parliament, as some ships didn't have the beast-like appendages.
persocom01 said: ... people have the expectation that many of the attributes of the resulting character designs have some real life historical basis.
But how much accurate are we talking about? How many attributes need to have real life historical basis? Won't that somehow limit the imagination and potential of the characters?
I asked before, should the height and weight of the characters be proportional to their real life counterpart? I mean, maybe they actually are in some cases... Destroyers are mostly young children. But then it doesn't apply to Nagato and Mutsu... Maybe we should demand more realistic depictions most specifically on the riggings?
The whole point here in this example is that the character has one turret too many and that seems to be unforgivable. Because being a warship, battling on the seas, using turrets, torpedoes, airplanes and anti-air turrets are not enough historical accuracy.
But I digress, like I said previously, it does make sense that any warship buff would be angry at an incorrect depiction of a warship. So, it does matter to them. I'm not even sure I have a point to defend here, I'm seriously enjoying the conversation. Don't think I'm trying to pick a fight, please.
And that does raise a point in case of the Northern Parliament, as some ships didn't have the beast-like appendages.
From a historical standpoint, that's actually consistent: the girls with Eagle-Union/Royal-Navy style mechanical rigging are Tsarist/White era designs (who strongly favored the US and UK in technology sharing) whereas the IronBlood/Siren-inspired mechanical-beast type rigging girls are Soviet/Red era designs (who strongly favored the Germans and Italians in technology sharing).
But how much accurate are we talking about? How many attributes need to have real life historical basis? Won't that somehow limit the imagination and potential of the characters?
I asked before, should the height and weight of the characters be proportional to their real life counterpart? I mean, maybe they actually are in some cases... Destroyers are mostly young children. But then it doesn't apply to Nagato and Mutsu... Maybe we should demand more realistic depictions most specifically on the riggings?
The whole point here in this example is that the character has one turret too many and that seems to be unforgivable. Because being a warship, battling on the seas, using turrets, torpedoes, airplanes and anti-air turrets are not enough historical accuracy.
The rigging is the one thing that matters most. That's the only thing connecting them to the ships they're supposed to personify. The appearance of the girl, her personality, those can be whatever, though there's often some historical or anecdotal influence seen there as well, the state/city Eagle Union ships are named after are sometimes represented in their designs for example.
But you're never really gonna get the girl "right". Someone's always gonna complain that the personality and/or appearance doesn't fit the ship she's supposed to be, and every artist is gonna have a different idea of what those should be like.
The rigging, however, is how you identify the ship, the guns and radars and torpedoes the girl is equipped with are how you prove who she is. If you showed me a girl equipped with some warship guns, and said she was USS Cleveland, but her rigging was composed entirely of equipment used by IJN Mogami, then the only proof that this girl was Cleveland is your insistence that that's who she's supposed to be.
The German and Russian ships having more monstrous and seemingly living rigging parts doesn't change this, either. They're all still using the same guns they used historically, they're recognizable by the equipment they're using. People have been able to guess which ship was being teased from a silhouette just because they could see how many turrets her main guns had or how many guns she had.
If they don't get the rigging right, then there's little point in personifying historical warships at all, at that point it's just an anime girl that happens to share the name. There's no point personifying anything at all if you don't get the important details right.
From a historical standpoint, that's actually consistent: the girls with Eagle-Union/Royal-Navy style mechanical rigging are Tsarist/White era designs (who strongly favored the US and UK in technology sharing) whereas the IronBlood/Siren-inspired mechanical-beast type rigging girls are Soviet/Red era designs (who strongly favored the Germans and Italians in technology sharing).
That's very interesting. Does reinforce the importance of historical research for the representation.
blindVigil said: The rigging is the one thing that matters most. That's the only thing connecting them to the ships they're supposed to personify. The appearance of the girl, her personality, those can be whatever...
Makes sense, but feels sad, to me. If the only thing that matters is the correct representation of the ship, and the girls appearance, personality, quirks and all are irrelevant, wouldn't the player be better served with a game about the ships themselves, without all this personifictaion thing? I mean, lots of the ships skins sell based on being eye-candy or sexy artwork, so at this point, the riggings start being ignored and the attention goes to the girl's appearance and personality. I suppose then, the whole cosmetic skin is irrelevant to the player that fixates on historical accuracy?
Sorry, I might seem to be acting like a troll at times, it's not really my intention. The whole AL universe happens in a different reality, in a way different way that KC does, for example. Characters don't seem to act like they are incarnations of previous real battleships that sunk in real battles like KC does, so I wonder if the events themselves are based on historical events or not.
Personally, I play for the cute girls, I don't know how to differentiate one ship from the other. Of course, I've been absorbing some basic knowledge... I can at least not mix up a battleship with a carrier...
blindVigil said: If you showed me a girl equipped with some warship guns, and said she was USS Cleveland, but her rigging was composed entirely of equipment used by IJN Mogami, then the only proof that this girl was Cleveland is your insistence that that's who she's supposed to be.
Yes, you are totally right. That would be completely pushing it, and I should have been clearer, complete disconnect with reality is extremelly rude to the inspiration source. Your example would totally give that awfull direspectful feeling we get when we see those totally wrong knock-off bootleg products on the irregular market. Like digimon in pokeballs, or some Avengers backpack with Shrek in place of the Hulk...
Still, and that's my opinion, I feel that being angry at the wrong number of turrets is too much. But then again, would I accept a Sega Master System personification with 6 button controllers? I guess not, so... Yes, I said it before, but I can see why it would bother warship fans. Is it a detail? Yes, it is. But I guess that is why it matters...
People have been able to guess which ship was being teased from a silhouette just because they could see how many turrets her main guns had or how many guns she had. There's no point personifying anything at all if you don't get the important details right.
If people can recognize a ship for the amount and style of equipment from a silhouette, more power to them. I'm impressed. I can't exactly see the difference in the styles of radars and turrets, so I would totally fail at that. And yes, you got me, like I said in the previous paragraph, details are important, it's where you show respect to the inspirational source. But how much details are enough? Just like we always have people unsatisfied by the "girls" personalities and appearance, won't we have people that can always find the "riggings" lacking in some part?
TL;DR I can now understand why Bremerton having one turret too many would matter to lots of people.
I just wonder she was made with four turrets for aesthetic reasons because the artists likes symmetry, or if it was a lack of respect and research to the original Bremerton. I believe it's the former, it was simply some artistic freedom for a style that better satisfied him, with no intention to offend anyone.
Makes sense, but feels sad, to me. If the only thing that matters is the correct representation of the ship, and the girls appearance, personality, quirks and all are irrelevant, wouldn't the player be better served with a game about the ships themselves, without all this personifictaion thing? I mean, lots of the ships skins sell based on being eye-candy or sexy artwork, so at this point, the riggings start being ignored and the attention goes to the girl's appearance and personality. I suppose then, the whole cosmetic skin is irrelevant to the player that fixates on historical accuracy?
I didn't mean to imply that the girls themselves are irrelevant, obviously most players are playing for the girls, some players are playing for the ships, and some are playing for both. I play for the girls, personally, my naval knowledge is tangential at best.
My point was that the appearance and personality of the girls is entirely up to the interpretation of the artist/developer/writer, and will vary from person to person. You can use ships that are present in both KC and AL as an example, they're totally different. But this makes the girls and their appeal entirely subjective. Any complaints about them are going to be personal taste and opinion.
The rigging however is established, it has preexisting relevance. If you take the rigging away, you're left with just a regular girl. It's the thing that makes them a shipgirl. So if nothing else, that part should probably be accurate.
Sorry, I might seem to be acting like a troll at times, it's not really my intention. The whole AL universe happens in a different reality, in a way different way that KC does, for example. Characters don't seem to act like they are incarnations of previous real battleships that sunk in real battles like KC does, so I wonder if the events themselves are based on historical events or not.
AL shipgirls reference historical events all the time. Their profiles and introduction lines usually make mention of one or more of their notable achievements, and many of them have multiple lines, some vague and some blunt, referencing battles they participated in, enemy ships they sank or were sunk by, ect. Minneapolis expresses some minor anxiety regarding torpedoes because she was critically wounded by one. Royal Navy ships mistaking Prinz Eugen for Bismarck and Bismarck subsequently sinking Hood in the prologue was a real life historical event.
All of the major events prior to the last US based event were recreations of actual historical events during the war. It wasn't until recently that events started to have original plots, because the Sirens were running "simulations" over and over to test shipgirls and humanity.
Still, and that's my opinion, I feel that being angry at the wrong number of turrets is too much.
But how much details are enough? Just like we always have people unsatisfied by the "girls" personalities and appearance, won't we have people that can always find the "riggings" lacking in some part?
Being angry about it is definitely unreasonable. There's always gonna be someone who's more pissed off than they have any need to be. Especially when this hasn't been a problem with other ships, the devs clearly take the character design process very seriously, and mistakes like this are very uncommon.
That said, while I don't strongly care and wouldn't have even noticed if it wasn't pointed out, I do feel that at least the type and number of guns is worth getting right, it hardly seems like a small thing to overlook.
TL;DR I can now understand why Bremerton having one turret too many would matter to lots of people.
I just wonder she was made with four turrets for aesthetic reasons because the artists likes symmetry, or if it was a lack of respect and research to the original Bremerton. I believe it's the former, it was simply some artistic freedom for a style that better satisfied him, with no intention to offend anyone.
I actually looked up the real life Bremerton cause of this. Two of her three main guns are situated on her bow(front) and the third is on her stern(back). If you look at AL Bremerton, her rigging consists of two ship bows. Baltimore's rigging is the exact same way, it's two bows, but she has two guns on one side and a single gun on the other.
This makes it look to me like it was entirely an oversight, they used the same rigging idea for Bremerton, because they're sister ships, but accidentally added a fourth gun. It could've been intentional, of course, but if it worked for Baltimore I see no reason it couldn't have worked for Bremerton.
This was definitely a mistake, it's happened before. Not all artists are good at mechanical design or naval buffs (particularly since Manjuu, unlike C2, doesn't make a point of going for artists with a mecha musume background).
It will probably get fixed at some point, AL plays it fast and loose with many things but they do try to keep the rigging accurate.
All of the major events prior to the last US based event were recreations of actual historical events during the war. It wasn't until recently that events started to have original plots, because the Sirens were running "simulations" over and over to test shipgirls and humanity.
I must say I personally don't like the story and events recreating history. That's silly of me, but I kinda get miffed at the disconnect between my base and the "serious" parts of the story. Mostly because I like laid back narratives myself. XD I mean, we have Bismark sinking Hood, Bismark being sunk. Conflicts between Ironblood and Eagle Union and Royal Navy all around.
Yet, I can put them all to mingle together in a bath filled with beer or a pool of plastic balls. So, I kinda like more slice of life events than historical accuracy. I guess you can say I'm in the part of the fandom that likes to see silly jokes and interactions between all characters.
And now, I'm sure there would be people angry if we had events with Ironbloods mingling peacefully with the Royal Navy... But, well, there is always someone angry, anyways. XD
BTW, it seems the new event just went up. But I'm still spending all my sanity in Arknights, since they also just got a new event.
And now, I'm sure there would be people angry if we had events with Ironbloods mingling peacefully with the Royal Navy... But, well, there is always someone angry, anyways. XD
We have had events with the Ironblood ships interacting peacefully with the Royal Navy ships, including the other factions. Wales and Eugen even have a lot of lines in their alternate skins that show they get along very well, they're almost a canon couple.
We have had events with the Ironblood ships interacting peacefully with the Royal Navy ships, including the other factions. Wales and Eugen even have a lot of lines in their alternate skins that show they get along very well, they're almost a canon couple.
Damn, I don't usually buy skins. I need more disposable income.
Also, I've been posting too much in the same picture... Is it kinda wrong to do so?