Jump to content


Commonwealth Destroyer Line(s)

Commonwealth Destroyers Commonwealth Destroyers Canadian Australian Indian RCN RAN British Royal Navy

  • Please log in to reply
51 replies to this topic

Poll: Commonwealth Full Destroyer Tree, For or Against? (68 members have cast votes)

Do you want to see / play a full Destroyer Line in the Commonwealth Tree / Branch?

  1. Yes, about time that Canada and Australia gets their due! (49 votes [72.06%])

    Percentage of vote: 72.06%

  2. No, there is nothing unique about them (12 votes [17.65%])

    Percentage of vote: 17.65%

  3. I don't know (7 votes [10.29%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.29%

Vote Guests cannot vote Hide poll

mofton #41 Posted 10 March 2017 - 08:47 PM

    Commander

  • Members

  • 3,037
  • Member since:
    10-22-2015

View Postmr3awsome, on 27 February 2017 - 02:24 AM, said:

I said a couple of C&P premiums is okay, but a line of C&P ships isn't. No contradiction. 

 

View PostElectroVeeDub, on 06 March 2017 - 08:17 PM, said:

Wanna lose all these ships to satisfy your prerequisites?

 

There is no contradiction in not wanting a whole line but thinking premiums are ok. 

 

To me there's no issue in wanting neither a 'Pan-Asian' or 'Commonwealth' tree. 

 

View PostLordHood2552, on 10 March 2017 - 09:45 AM, said:

But as the article in the issue said “fans of Lo Yang and Anshan will look forward to a researchable branch of ships”

View PostLordHood2552, on 09 March 2017 - 07:49 PM, said:

“consisting of RU, US and Japanese ships”

 

I don't think this is a good call, and I don't understand how they'll do it but it's WG's game so, well good luck to them. It'll mean I don't know what on gun caliber with 120, 127 and 133mm guns bouncing around, I have no idea how they'll make it feel like a progressive tree rather than a Frankenstein. 

 

There are some differences between a Pan-Asian DD and Commonwealth DD branch. Apparently as you point out the ships will be drawn from 3 nations, so there may be more fertile ground to draw. The 2017 preview for instance included 3 Russian high tier DD - Smeliy, Neutrashimy and Pr. 56: https://worldofwarsh.../whatsinthebox/ and so far the Russians at least have plenty of options. Japan already struggles with endless Fubuki-derivative designs but there are some re-arms. The US has some 'spare' classes but space to differentiate is smaller now (hydro is the German thing apparently). 

 

A Commonwealth DD line however would draw exclusively from RN designs, of which there aren't necessarily a whole bunch of classes 'spare' from the tree, or with great differences. Technically you could use some very similar but different classes but overall you need 9 tiers worth of different ships from the RN when at several tiers there aren't many options. 

 

Hard to keep that fresh, different and balanced.

 

 


light.png

Iowanna be a rockstar - Salmon - Ctrl-Click-Schiffe - Le Dunkerque - Grand Old Lady - ~5 Mil in IJN Scrap

Gearings of Poor - Trashcan - Biscuit-tweaker - Tachi-Ali-Baba - Not-quite-Minekaze - Zit-23 - Shinbone - Your-a-gnome

Dakka Moines - AbSchorring - Dakka-Dakka-taur


ElectroVeeDub #42 Posted 14 March 2017 - 05:42 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 441
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View Postmofton, on 10 March 2017 - 08:47 PM, said:

A Commonwealth DD line however would draw exclusively from RN designs, of which there aren't necessarily a whole bunch of classes 'spare' from the tree, or with great differences. Technically you could use some very similar but different classes but overall you need 9 tiers worth of different ships from the RN when at several tiers there aren't many options. 

 

 

 

The problem here is how do you differentiate between British, Canadian, Australian, and possibly Indian built and/or designed ships? The Commonwealth legally speaking at one time was one and the same as Britain.

 

Keep in mind that Britain did not necessarily develop those ships without direct or indirect help from her colonies, namely Canada and Australia.

 



mofton #43 Posted 14 March 2017 - 08:11 PM

    Commander

  • Members

  • 3,037
  • Member since:
    10-22-2015

View PostElectroVeeDub, on 14 March 2017 - 09:42 AM, said:

The problem here is how do you differentiate between British, Canadian, Australian, and possibly Indian built and/or designed ships? The Commonwealth legally speaking at one time was one and the same as Britain.

 

Keep in mind that Britain did not necessarily develop those ships without direct or indirect help from her colonies, namely Canada and Australia.

 

My read is that 'Commonwealth' by which at the time they really mean British Empire design work outside the UK was extremely limited if not nil. There are some revisions to designs but mr3awsome gave a fairly good breakdown of what ships are cookie-cutter and which aren't. 

 

By WWII I think the Tribals were the biggest warships built in Australia/Canada aside from HMAS Adelaide, a modified Town-class. I believe design experience was very lacking. From reading Friedman on both cruisers and destroyers external input seems to have been slight. The Tribals had slight changes made for instance, but the most different version with 2x 2 4in isn't likely to make it into the game. 

 

 

If the ships do need differentiation it is possible, see Lo Yang vs. Benson with hydro and markedly different torpedoes for a different-enough ship, but only a premium. A whole line of Lo Yang's? That's trickier, doesn't foster much diversity and isn't necessarily healthy. I don't think a hydro/torp version of Farragut through Gearing would be a good move if re-flagged 'Pan-Asian'. Ditto a whole line of 'Commonwealth-ized' RN DD/CL.

 

 

We can have quite a good number of Commonwealth premiums though. The whole supposed reason for the split was to prevent the RN from having too many premiums (after 2 years it has 3, so yeah a major worry...) currently I think the RU Cruiser line has the most premiums with 6, the Commonwealth could get similar numbers and still represent a lot of historic ships. 


light.png

Iowanna be a rockstar - Salmon - Ctrl-Click-Schiffe - Le Dunkerque - Grand Old Lady - ~5 Mil in IJN Scrap

Gearings of Poor - Trashcan - Biscuit-tweaker - Tachi-Ali-Baba - Not-quite-Minekaze - Zit-23 - Shinbone - Your-a-gnome

Dakka Moines - AbSchorring - Dakka-Dakka-taur


LordHood2552 #44 Posted 15 March 2017 - 01:13 AM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 83
  • Member since:
    10-10-2015

View PostElectroVeeDub, on 14 March 2017 - 12:42 PM, said:

 

The problem here is how do you differentiate between British, Canadian, Australian, and possibly Indian built and/or designed ships? The Commonwealth legally speaking at one time was one and the same as Britain.

 

Keep in mind that Britain did not necessarily develop those ships without direct or indirect help from her colonies, namely Canada and Australia.

 

 

That issue has already been solved.

 

Just before the start of the Second World War, to distinguish it’s ships from the RN, the RCN started painting a Green Maple Leaf on its ships’ funnels. Post-war this was changed to a Red Maple Leaf.

 

Also during the war and post war, the RAN and RNZN did this as well, with a Red Kangaroo and Kiwi Bird respectively painted on their funnels

 

Not sure yet if India and South Africa did this as well, but it would seem logical



LordHood2552 #45 Posted 15 March 2017 - 01:21 AM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 83
  • Member since:
    10-10-2015

A good example of this is if you look at a Picture of HMCS Haida today

 

You can see the Red Maple Leaf on her funnel

 

https://en.wikipedia...n_Ontario_1.jpg

 



mofton #46 Posted 15 March 2017 - 02:22 AM

    Commander

  • Members

  • 3,037
  • Member since:
    10-22-2015

View PostLordHood2552, on 14 March 2017 - 05:13 PM, said:

That issue has already been solved.

 

That's not really the differentiation I was thinking of, which was primarily in terms of gameplay and variety and secondarily in terms of visuals.

 

The funnel badges are entirely inadequate visual clues to ships which have the same hulls, largely same AA, likely same camouflage depending on their timing and location and fly the same White Ensign.

 

 

Gameplay wise you'll have ships which will be entirely similar to the RN in hulls, which will look identical (the used Perth is about the most visually distinctive Commonwealth warship IMO as the Brits sold all of the Amphion subclass to Australia and kept all the Batch-I Leander's). There's limited scope to mess about with consumables without being directly better, or directly worse which matters much more with a whole line than a 1-off premium i.e Perth is far inferior to Leander.

 

As another example, take the storm in a teacup of Prinz Eugen vs. Hipper, some people were massively disappointed Eugen was just a Hipper with a few more HP and a bit less maneuverability. I personally think that was fine, demands for repair or radar on PE would have been P2W. However, Eugen had the advantage of at least looking distinctive in some ways with her Atlantic Bow, an advantage almost all proposed Commonwealth variants would lack.


light.png

Iowanna be a rockstar - Salmon - Ctrl-Click-Schiffe - Le Dunkerque - Grand Old Lady - ~5 Mil in IJN Scrap

Gearings of Poor - Trashcan - Biscuit-tweaker - Tachi-Ali-Baba - Not-quite-Minekaze - Zit-23 - Shinbone - Your-a-gnome

Dakka Moines - AbSchorring - Dakka-Dakka-taur


SheepDogTribal #47 Posted 17 March 2017 - 10:04 PM

    Seaman

  • Members

  • 10
  • Member since:
    08-25-2014
Yes.  I'd be 100% in favor of a full Commonwealth DD line.

 

When you can't bring Flowers, Haida will do nicely, thank you.

 


CDN_Navalseaman #48 Posted 01 April 2017 - 12:47 AM

    Seaman Recruit

  • Members

  • 1
  • Member since:
    12-07-2015
I'd be all in favour of a common wealth DD line or just a couple commonwealth premiums like Haida. I'm a serving Canadian sailor and would really like to employ a piece of Canadian naval history.

Selelai #49 Posted 02 April 2017 - 06:43 PM

    Seaman

  • Members

  • 39
  • Member since:
    02-03-2013
I'm all for more commonwealth ships. The issue I have with adding a commonwealth DD line, which is the same problem I have with adding any new DD line, is how will they be any different in play style from the DD's we all ready have? Personally, I feel all the niches DD's can fill are already being filled and the only reason add them would be for national pride and that, to me doesn't really justify a whole new ship line, premiums, yes, but a whole line? Don't get me wrong, I really, really want more commonwealth ships in game but what would they do gameplay-wise that isn't already being done? That's a serious question btw.

Joe__defender_destroyer #50 Posted 04 April 2017 - 01:33 AM

    Chief Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 146
  • Member since:
    05-18-2016
Yeah I would like to see a new Destroyer line after lets say a disappointing German line.

LordHood2552 #51 Posted 13 May 2017 - 03:40 AM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 83
  • Member since:
    10-10-2015

Sorry about the delay folks.

 

Between the end of classes and other things happening I haven’t had much time to do other than an occasional post on the forums.

 

I’m currently working on another version (or 2 I should say) of my Commonwealth Destroyer Line Proposal that’s a bit more flushed out than the first one I cobbled together.

 

Also with the news of the new RN G Class Destroyer Premium Destroyer Gallant being announced recently, I’ve had to take another look at what to list in my Commonwealth DD Lines.

 

So stay tuned folks and hopefully I’ll have something new coming soon to this post near you

 



Jakajan #52 Posted 13 May 2017 - 11:32 PM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 888
  • Member since:
    09-26-2015
What was wrong with the German line? I love them.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users