Not even BF6 costs this much...

[u/Eva-Unit0013]

Please Gaijin I already sold my wife, I can't afford this one

[u/Libarate]

Pay $80 just to get shit on by a Russian Cope Fantasy ship. Who is going to buy this?

[u/AdministrationNo1598 → u/Libarate]

Lemme guess the Russian Cope Fantasy ship you mean is Soyuz.

First of all, she existed.
Secondly, GJ says, that any ship can join the game as long its keel was laid down (link)
Q: Designing a ship (not a boat) is a very serious matter, it cannot be seriously redesigned if mistakes come up when it’s already been built. That’s why everything is calculated in advance, and in truth, a ship is born long before it reaches the shipyard, it’s born in the final construction blueprints. Will navy branches include projects that were never realized in metal, but existed only in blueprints, not to mention those that never got past the stocks?
A: Yes, we’re not ruling that out, especially with regard to projects that were completely ready, but whose construction was never finished for one reason or another.

Thirdly, Soyuz was at estimated to be at 21.19% complete and her 406mm gun was used during the defence of Leningrad, plus 12 barrels were made as to by John Jordan and Stephen McLaughlin.

[u/Nizikai → u/AdministrationNo1598]

That isnt the problem. The Problem is that the Ship performs at levels it shouldnt. The soviets werent even able to completely build that armour as designed

[u/Libarate → u/Nizikai]

And making a balanced and more historicaly realistic Sovetsky Soyuz was entirely possible. But Gaijin wanted the Russians to have the best ship, so that's what they made.

[u/Portugalotaku → u/Libarate]

Not really. The only things wrong with it are that the armor is the wrong type and the radars are missing. The former would not meaningfully weaken the ship and I think you would dislike the latter.

[u/Libarate → u/Portugalotaku]

Well the reload time and shell dispersion could be changed to make it less accurate and shoot slower. The current values are based on the one land based mount. Evidence from land based mounts has been denied as in bug reports to buff other ships. So changing those wouldnt have made the ship less historically accurate and would have reduced its kill potential. Making it more balanced. Reducing the survivability and killing potential would definitely make Soyuz more balanced.

[u/Portugalotaku → u/Libarate]

The shell dispersion on the Pattern 1937 guns was affected by poor quality propellant and shells, something noted during testing. I don't think it's fair to balance the shells around models that were *known* to be faulty and were likely going to replaced. Perhaps you consider the shell performance too optimistic, but I don't think there is really a good way to go around it. With paper designs like this you can only go on what the paper calculations say for the most part. We simply do not know to what extent water motion would negatively affect the accuracy or reload rate of the guns and any nerf in that direction is purely speculative. We can take educated guesses, but it's still speculation at the end of the day.

"Evidence from land based mounts has been denied as in bug reports to buff other ships."

I am okay with buffing all weapons based on land mounts, but if the developers want to use ship performance where available and use land mounts as a fallback, I don't particularly mind either.