Jump to content


With HMS Hood now an AA ship, what should Renown become?


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

HMS_Formidable #1 Posted 19 May 2017 - 12:03 AM

    Ensign

  • Beta Testers

  • 1,016
  • Member since:
    09-25-2012

Because 'balanz':

 

Hood was not intended to be an AA ship in her 'as sunk' incarnation.

However, there were proposals to rebuild her along the lines of HMS Renown with 10x 4.5in twin mounts and several 8x 40mm PomPom pods. Another proposal gave her 6x 5.25 twin mounts for the same purpose.

This never happened as war broke out before the rebuild could be initiated.

 

Please note: "along the lines of HMS Renown".

Renown WAS rebuilt as an anti-aircraft battlecruiser.

 

Now, Wargaming in its wisdom has made HMS Hood an AA battlecruiser.

Even though her in-game hull has not been rebuilt "along the lines of HMS Renown".

So what does this make Renown?

 

Given HMS Renown was the real-life anti-aircraft carrier escort battlecruiser in her 1939 rebuild configuration, perhaps Wargaming can now distort her to become ...

  •  Give her super-buffed AP shells (15 in equivalents to the RN cruiser line's fantasy 6in shells?) to make her a Yamato killer?
  •  How about padding out her seaplane capacity/cooldown, to give her a supporting reconnaissance role? (Taking Ise's 'flavour)
  •  What about giving her radar and hydroacoustics to make her the ultimate smoked destroyer/cruiser killer (Taking Warspite's unrequited Narvik flavour)

Edited by HMS_Formidable, 19 May 2017 - 12:21 AM.

http://www.armouredcarriers.com/title/

 

It is often said that the battleship died because it was vulnerable:
this cannot be correct since the new capital ship, the carrier, was far more vulnerable.
The battleship died because it had very little capability for damaging the enemy.

— Brown, D. K: Nelson to Vanguard: Warship Design and Development 


HowitzerBlitzer #2 Posted 19 May 2017 - 12:14 AM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 1,061
  • Member since:
    06-16-2013
Needs more rocket turrets!

 Signature by HowitzerBlitzer

Yam + Tomato = Yamato


HMS_Formidable #3 Posted 19 May 2017 - 12:15 AM

    Ensign

  • Beta Testers

  • 1,016
  • Member since:
    09-25-2012

View PostHowitzerBlitzer, on 19 May 2017 - 09:44 AM, said:

Needs more rocket turrets!

 

Good point. Perhaps the upgrade hull can replace all the 4.5 twin turrets with the projectors?

http://www.armouredcarriers.com/title/

 

It is often said that the battleship died because it was vulnerable:
this cannot be correct since the new capital ship, the carrier, was far more vulnerable.
The battleship died because it had very little capability for damaging the enemy.

— Brown, D. K: Nelson to Vanguard: Warship Design and Development 


HMS_Formidable #4 Posted 19 May 2017 - 12:18 AM

    Ensign

  • Beta Testers

  • 1,016
  • Member since:
    09-25-2012

This is what an RN 1939 anti-aircraft battlecruiser looks like

 


Edited by HMS_Formidable, 19 May 2017 - 12:18 AM.

http://www.armouredcarriers.com/title/

 

It is often said that the battleship died because it was vulnerable:
this cannot be correct since the new capital ship, the carrier, was far more vulnerable.
The battleship died because it had very little capability for damaging the enemy.

— Brown, D. K: Nelson to Vanguard: Warship Design and Development 


HMS_Formidable #5 Posted 19 May 2017 - 12:33 AM

    Ensign

  • Beta Testers

  • 1,016
  • Member since:
    09-25-2012

This is not the HMS Hood / anti-aircraft battlecruiser you are looking for...

It's an imposter

 

 


http://www.armouredcarriers.com/title/

 

It is often said that the battleship died because it was vulnerable:
this cannot be correct since the new capital ship, the carrier, was far more vulnerable.
The battleship died because it had very little capability for damaging the enemy.

— Brown, D. K: Nelson to Vanguard: Warship Design and Development 


Sir_Davos_Seaworth #6 Posted 19 May 2017 - 02:01 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Members

  • 1,600
  • Member since:
    03-17-2016
Here is a question: Do you think the Renown will be a Premium or be a Tree ship? If she is free ship that can do most of what Hood can do, then I'd be okay with it...As it is, the Hood is meh...

The Onion Knight demands trial by World of Warships

Fleet in Being at Put-In-Bay Ohio: Brig, Niagara. Ironclad, Michigan (latter Wolverine)

 

 

 


HMS_Formidable #7 Posted 19 May 2017 - 02:04 AM

    Ensign

  • Beta Testers

  • 1,016
  • Member since:
    09-25-2012

View PostSir_Davos_Seaworth, on 19 May 2017 - 11:31 AM, said:

Here is a question: Do you think the Renown will be a Premium or be a Tree ship? If she is free ship that can do most of what Hood can do, then I'd be okay with it...As it is, the Hood is meh...

 

Dunno. She was a solo ship. There were no plans to rebuild Repulse along her lines... (only Hood)

So the tree ship would make more sense being a Repulse-style ship (as there were at least two conforming to her general outline in the 1930s...)

 

But I cannot see Wargaming wanting to have TWO British anti-aircraft battlecruisers.

So a fantasy 're-imagining' of Renown is therefore a must...

 

It's all about 'flavour'


Edited by HMS_Formidable, 19 May 2017 - 02:05 AM.

http://www.armouredcarriers.com/title/

 

It is often said that the battleship died because it was vulnerable:
this cannot be correct since the new capital ship, the carrier, was far more vulnerable.
The battleship died because it had very little capability for damaging the enemy.

— Brown, D. K: Nelson to Vanguard: Warship Design and Development 


HazeGrayUnderway #8 Posted 19 May 2017 - 02:48 AM

    Rear Admiral

  • Members

  • 7,108
  • Member since:
    03-13-2015
I wouldn't call Hood an AA boat.  I'm seeing them get TB'd to death.  There's a lot of BBs playing today and that drew out the DDs and CVs looking for target rich environments.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway, 19 May 2017 - 02:48 AM.


HMS_Formidable #9 Posted 19 May 2017 - 03:32 AM

    Ensign

  • Beta Testers

  • 1,016
  • Member since:
    09-25-2012

View PostHazeGrayUnderway, on 19 May 2017 - 12:18 PM, said:

I wouldn't call Hood an AA boat.  I'm seeing them get TB'd to death.  There's a lot of BBs playing today and that drew out the DDs and CVs looking for target rich environments.

 

the AA option is - however - still an important part of this fraud Hood's 'flavour'

Therefore the need for a new fraud Renown flavour...


http://www.armouredcarriers.com/title/

 

It is often said that the battleship died because it was vulnerable:
this cannot be correct since the new capital ship, the carrier, was far more vulnerable.
The battleship died because it had very little capability for damaging the enemy.

— Brown, D. K: Nelson to Vanguard: Warship Design and Development 


mr3awsome #10 Posted 19 May 2017 - 07:22 AM

    Fleet Admiral

  • Supertester
  • Alpha Tester
    In AlfaTesters
    Beta Testers

  • 13,706
  • Member since:
    08-16-2012

View PostHMS_Formidable, on 19 May 2017 - 02:04 AM, said:

Dunno. She was a solo ship. There were no plans to rebuild Repulse along her lines... (only Hood)

As far as I know, they were also planning to rebuild Repulse, but as she'd had a major refit quite recently, Hood was seen as the greater priority to rebuild. 

Same applies to Malaya, iirc. 

 

Assuming we get a 1944 Renown as a premium (the regular being a rebuilt Repulse), another anti-air based premium, but one based on guns rather than rockets, isn't out of the question. 

Then again, I don't have access to whatever drugs WG & Lesta are on, so what so I know?

 

 


 


Poland has more unique warships to contribute than Canada.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users