World of Warships Gameplay Trailer

Posted on by

Hello everyone,

check this out. This was published on IGN some hours ago – World of Warships gameplay trailer.

The graphics do look good, don’t they. Still… we’ll just have to see how well this goes.

62 thoughts on “World of Warships Gameplay Trailer”

  2. Finally a bit of released footage.
    Not much, but better than ending up watching battle stations pacific gameplay again.

  4. I’m waiting for this so I can finally stop playing wot. Didn’t they say release in December or something? (probably CBT but still, we might see some gameplay videos)

    • Most warships could reach speeds of over 25 knots, which makes them faster than most tanks from the same eras.

      • What I think he meant if that they react like speedboats.
        They don’t have kilometer long turn radii and speed correction distances like they would IRL.

        Which is for the best.
        Seriously, this is a 15(?) minute long team deathmatch arena game. There is no time for realistic naval maneuvers.

        • Warships don’t have kilometers long turn radii. At least destroyers could throw themselves around like nobodies business in combat. I don’t really see anything wrong with the turns in the vid, its not like they are turning on their axis or something.

          • The bismark was rated at 772m at 11 knots to starboard, and 862m at 27 knots.

            Maneuverable battleships and carriers were listed at around 800m when traveling at around 30 knots.
            Which is over a minute’s worth of turning just for a 180 degree turn.

            • I don’t see any BS or carriers turning harder than that in the video….. BS there are turning like 10 degrees in 5 seconds of footage, which if they were trying to do a 180 would take way longer than a minute. The only real hard turn in that vid is being done by a destroyer, and even that doesn’t look particularly hard compared to what the better ww 2 destroyers could do.

  9. Cmon guys, u belive it? I predict that there will be only camping sniper duels, no impressive fleet gunfights/QQs/rammers.

    • Ships are not like tanks they cannot turn without having enough forward speed. No reversing back into hard cover. A stationary ship is an easy target for just about everything. Yes there will be long range artillery duels between the big guns. WoWS should be more dynamic and strategic than Wot as everything will be moving constantly to get guns on target and avoid gunfire, torpedoes from ships and aircraft and bombs. Stopping to aim is certain death and it would take too long anyway.

  11. looks like shit historical accuracy wise. I mean, torpedoes where never the main weapon, but in wows its going to be that they are your primary way of defeating the enemy. and there is no submarines, and apparently aircraft have a cool down timer. nope, never gonna play it, never gonna like it. another wowp here we come. ans wot will soon end up like wowp too. and i dont have a negative oppinion because i want to, its because i dont like what i see, and actually want a non crap navy combat game. oh well, war thunder ships will prob be out in a year or two hopefully, and wt tanks and wt aircraft are both very fun to play imo, so my money is on wt ships being good too.

    • Kind of have to agree on the last part: WT planes is miles better than WoWp and WT:GF is every bit as fun as WoT.I’m expecting WT Ships to be better that WoWs too…
      Still,I haven’t lost hope,after all WG developed WoT which is a great game.
      Regarding the trailer itself,after seeing WT trailers it’s hard to impress me with this,but I suppose the point was actually to show you some game play and not impress you with eye candy CGI.
      Anyhow,I still hope that maybe in a few years,WG will fix WoWp and will do a good job with WoWs while Gaijin keeps up the good work and doesn’t mess up with WT Ships so we would have a nice competition between them and we,the player,to profit from it as much as we can,enjoying two types of game play: Realistic and Arcade.

    • Yes, do tell how an arena-based 15v15 ship brawl isn’t historical accurate.

      Also, you fail at historical accuracy yourself, since subs were mainly used to disrupt supply lines, raid harbors, and fire the occasional torpedoes at targets of opportunity that they just happened to cross.
      Seeing as subs rely on being stealthy, attacking unaware enemies…going in the middle of a battle with a sub when everyone is on full alert, and every ship doing evasive maneuvers is completely pointless, and as far away from historical accuracy as destroyers spamming torpedoes in knife-fights.

      And considering how well Gaijin made tanks, I wouldn’t expect anything from ships.

    • The fact that the footage shows lots of torpedoes means nothing – they are just visually attractive is my guess.

      And using subs in 15 vs 15 combat is just a poor choice, really. Germans knew why they used wolfpacks, preferably on convoys and sole ships.

    • I do agree with you about WT planes being far better than WoWP(It should), but WT GF is a total disappointment , it is aimed at being historical , but introduces numerous fake tanks(or concept ones),REALLY shitty game mechanics(just look at those bouncing shell videos) and a screwed-up physics engine(what tank glues to a brick wall after touching it?)

      • For the record, the ‘fakest’ tanks in WTGF are the Tiger II (105) and the Coelian. Both never being built. The only fake vehicle in WT is the XP-38G, which is scheduled for replacement.

    • Say it to the USA ships in Savo battle… the true was that in WWII main antiship weapon was torpedo, specially air torpedo but ships using torpedos do a great job to here.

      You know that main problem with USA CA was they unlike japanese CAs dont use torpedos??? and well, if USA had better torpedos can do a lot better job in the Pacific.

      Submarines main job for european and USA was destroy merchants, for japanese go for combat ships (main error in the war for japanese navy) but you can find situations where even submarines were used as scorts for convoys.

      Lets see how is the game but i have a bad feeling here, i doubt a lot DDs can close range to engage BBs with torpedos… and CLs or CAs can move and manouver fast enough to avoid torpedos…. i want see how game is played when guys in BBs do the historical job in 2nd line and CAs CLs and DDs fight in the space between main battle lines…

      • The Japanese were vulnerable in having to move troops, supplies and raw materials by ship and allied submarines were very effective at attacking the Japanese supply lines. The Japanese subs on the other hand did not have the range or capability of disrupting allied war production or their supply lines to any great degree. So to be effective had to attack navy ships. A far more dangerous proposition since the allies had already made progress in anti-submarine tactics and technology from experience in the Atlantic.

        • Which is what is scary for me in gameplay.
          US ships laid down post-1941 are going to be filled to the brim with tech that makes them much more accurate than every other ship in the game….and they were just as big and well armed (save for the Yamato, and Musachi, but exceptions).
          What is going to be the balancing factor for US ships?

            • Is WoWS going to be nation against nation or a tier balanced mix of nations on each team? If it is nation based it will take forever to get teams matched for a game.

              @ewanc9 LOLed. But the British aircraft carriers had armoured flight decks so I know which ones I would take into battle.:)

              • RN: G’Afternoon sah. I’m thinking we could use a few new aircraft carriers. We can sell the old ones to india.

                Westminister: FantABulous idea old chap!
                Of course, we need to make benefits payments– and travel expenses for the dastardly lords and peers that clock in to work but don’t actually arrive too, so… Sell the planes too. I’m quite sure we can project the awesome naval power of our brand-spanking new carriers without them.
                Also we’re cutting the budget for your manpower too, so fire thirty or forty thousand people would you? There’s a good chap. Anyway, I’m off to my villa *cough* Tax haven in the seycheles.

                MoD: $#!7.
                Admiral of the Fleet: Ramming SP-HEEED.

            • While undeniably a top notch Navy, the ships were still not as good as late war US ships, which had the best range finders, turret control and more importantly, equipment built from lessons learnt from fighting both the German Navy in the Atlantic and the mighty Japanese navy with all its carriers in the Pacific.

              I’m a sucker for British ships too, I love the King Georges V class, but there is no denying that US ships near the end of the war were better.

              • Best range finders, turret control and equipment built with British tech transfer you mean? Maybe the USN perfected it in a different way but I don’t really know of any evidence to say it was better. The British learned just as many lessons fighting the Japanese as the USA did, and they both shared what they learned in any case.

                The Iowa class was obviously superior to anything Britain fielded in the war being both built with modern tech in mind and being bigger, but tech wise how were they any more advanced than the late KGV like Anson?

                A real question surrounds how the updating of ships will be handled, I mean looking at just the Anson she had 5 radar replacements,a complete fire control replacement, her seaplanes were removed and she had 3 different up armaments adding a total of 49 AA guns (87 barrels) all in 3 years of operation. She already had more advanced fire control and radar than the earlier KGVs so the difference across the class form 1939 to 1945 must have been massive. Will that be represented by grinding modules etc like wot?

    • In what way was Torpedoes not the main weapon? Every ship on ship engagement had destroyer runs launching Torpedoes, more ships were destroyed by torpedoes from destroyers in ww2 than from any class main guns. Even when an enemy ship was crippled they were all but impossible to sink unless torpedoed. Bismark and Scharnorst were both sunk by torpedoes from surface ships.

      Much of the main gun combat in naval battles of the period was in the hope of slowing the enemy down enough that a torpedo run could kill them.

      Wtf use would a sub be in a 15 vs 15 brawl anyway? Subs were about surprise attacks, no sub commander would go anywhere near a warship fleet at action stations, it would be suicide.

  15. Funny how they make it look so action packed. When in fact it’s just a boring fest on sea. Imagine what WG could have done for WoT with all the money wasted on this crap.

    • Yes. Imagine all the bugs we didn’t get in wot because of this games that isn’t even released yet.

    • Like wargaming are short on money? They have so much money in the bank they don’t know what to do with it. Whatever money they spent on WoWs will be recouped, it won’t flop like WoWp since it wont be going up against a fully complete challanger.

    • … and do “peek a boo” using the cover of islands… :)

      Seriously, a naval battle lasted hours, sometimes even a whole day, distances involved were several kilometers (up to 20 km for largest caliber guns)… everything WG gives us, no doubt will be highly un-historical.

  18. Hmm I just wonder whether that is an actual gameplay. I mean if it is then its really good but it looks too good – for WG that is :)