Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


Community Reputation

387 Excellent

About Commissar_Carl

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    The Dido Class of Crusier, at least as far as WOWS is concerned.
    And other stuff to. Model making, crappy movies, tanks, light writing, Locomotives, aircraft. basically anything that people make that moves, I'm there.

Recent Profile Visitors

2,765 profile views
  1. Commissar_Carl

    Incentivize Veteran Players to Play Mid & Low Tiers

    I had two friends who tried playing WOWS but just couldn't get into it because we couldn't get into games at low tiers, and coop was just farcical. Improving the population at low tiers gives new players a better environment to play in and will improve player retention.
  2. Well, that sucks. For being a game about historical warships, WG sure does miss the boat on why people would gravitate toward a ship. My interest in this line has deflated.
  3. So, I remember getting egg on my fact over Rahmat, getting upset about the fact that the dev blog showed 5.25s but listed 4.5s in the stats. Turns out they modeled both. Do we know that the B-hull does not return its secondary armament? Model changes are basically not possible. I specifically asked about Chumphon and flint getting fixed (they are egregious) and was told that it was regrettable, but not possible to fix short term. They also didn't commit to anything long term. Basically, it seems by the time they show us the model, it's already too late to change it.
  4. That may be the best chance, but that is not when the time frame of the invasion plan was. And I was incorrect, 1905 was the culmination of the german plans, the last point they semi-seriously considered a invasion, and they are much better positioned for victory then. Germany had 18 battleships, the US 13. Germany had 38 total cruisers (8 protected, 6 armored, 15 light and 9 unprotected). Us had 6 armored and 18 protected for 24 in total. Germany had 38 torpedo boats to America's 32. America had 16 DDs to Germany 0. America had 8 subs to Germany 0. And factoring in that the us needed to maintain a naval presence on the east and west coasts, as well as in the Phillipines, and that the Panama canal does not exist meaning that it would be ages before the pacific fleet could intervene... it seems much more likely that the germans could establish naval superiority on the east coast. A full invasion is a whole different matter.
  5. Maybe I'm missing something, but I thought this invasion was going to happen in 1903 if at all. The naval picture is much different then. The germans have 13 pre dreadnought, the Americans 11. The germans have 21 cruisers ( 4 armored, 8 protected, and 9 light) while the Americans have 19 (2 armored and 17 protected) The germans have 28 torpedo boats, the Americans have 35. The germans have no torpedo boat destroyers, the Americans have 16. The germans have no subs, the Americans have 8. And the Americans have 10 monitors, theoretically the germans can try and sail 8 coastal defense ships across the Atlantic. We can argue about the merits of the ships in question, but id say that the US navy has a home field advantage, as well as subs and dedicated ships to defeat torpedo boats. And that's before the germans try and land.
  6. Commissar_Carl

    DevBlog 325 - New ships - Closed Testing 0.11.5

    Would have been cool to get the turning torps on Canarias. And I have learned from the wierd pan asian Dido to not lose my mind on these initial stats too much, but we need to have a hull for renown with the full secondary battery, as opposed to this abortive refit.
  7. Sure, and that's why the 1945 proposals for the lion class basically all lost the torpedo tubes. But, every 1944 proposal did include guint tubes. also, RN battleships not having torpedo tubs was basically only a thing on the KGV class. every battleship from Dreadnought to Nelson had a torpedo armament of some sort, and the KGV's only removed it because of (a), weight and (b), the fact that the torpedoes either compromised the torpedo defense system or the belt armor. throwing the torpedoes in quint mounts wouldn't solve the weight issue, but it would no longer compromise the belt or TDS. my main point is that with the RN's major moves toward a heavy torpedo armament in the later half of the war, torpedoes on the battle-cruisers makes some sense.
  8. Honestly, the British were moving in the direction of increased torpedo armament across the navy. As examples, the N2 light cruiser proposal from 1943 initially had a quad launcher on each beam. This was upped to 2 quad launchers per beam (double the torps) before the design got superceded by the Neptunes... which also had 2 banks of torpedo launchers per sides. The Minotaur cruiser proposal had this too. The battle class destroyer, and especially the weapon class, had a reduced gun amount, but heavy AA and very heavy torpedo armament with both having 2 quintuple mounts. Same with the proposed 1944 g class, armed with 2 turrets, but 10 torps. There were even proposals for the lion class featuring torpedoes. Historically, I think this stems from their experience in the war. Bismarck was rendered totally combat incapable by gunfire, but wouldn't go down. Sharnhorst was also crippled by gunfire but sunk by torpedoes. Even at Cape Matapan, 2 of the 3 Italian cruisers had to be finished off by torpedoes, even after being subjected to a hail of 15 inch shelling. The experience was showing that while gunfire would cripple the enemy ships and render them combat ineffective, torpedoes were needed more often than not to deliver the killing blow.
  9. Commissar_Carl

    After RN Battlecruiser line???

    So, for what is already baked into the cake... support carriers for US and Japan Subs for us and Germany For what can be added after that. Soviet subs British subs Japanese subs French subs italian subs? Commonwealth DD's (sub hunters?) Royal Navy AA cruisers USN DD split I'm going to be blunt, the kriegsmarine is pretty much tapped out at this point, as are the Russians. French and Italian carriers can be added with a bit of fudging, but I think that we are getting close to the end of the games active development. I'd say 2 years or so worth of new content. The subs, as you can see, opens up a lot of new content if they implement them as most nations can fill out a full 3-10 tech tree, to say nothing of a 6-10 tech tree with only 3 boats.
  10. Commissar_Carl

    Ships of the Line: RN AA CL's Redux

    WG says you already have that with Colbert. But I'm totally with you, that wacky gun arrangement is sick. Fun fact, when they were picking the final design for the fijis this was one of them, and one of the arguments for it was 'making a novel design would be good for our pristiege as design leaders." Screw convention and capability, our new boat is wierd for the sake of being wierd! Added the torps to the description, thought I had them included...
  11. Commissar_Carl

    Ships of the Line: RN AA CL's Redux

    Uh, none of these are my ships, so you can yoink all of them.
  12. Commissar_Carl

    Ship proposal: HMS Melbourne

    am a I fan of it, not really, but WG may be all over it.
  13. Commissar_Carl

    Ships of the Line: RN AA CL's Redux

    good point. Dont switch to VT shells if you are engaging a sub.
  14. Commissar_Carl

    Ships of the Line: RN AA CL's Redux

    You mean these very wholesome drapes, right? That is the plan for the tier 10. Sirius now has to be at tier 6. it ought to be at tier 7. Dido ought to have been at tier 7, but no, they nerfed the crap out of it. and so, Sirius needs to be at tier 6 with its sister ships so that people wont make fail divs if they want to have a ulitmate Dido class flotilla. Glad that you like the proposal... buuuuut I kinda have to agree with mouse. she said that her idea should be a option for ships with a dual purpose primary armament. yes, this does exclude BB's and most CL's only leaving destroyers with dual purpose guns and certain cruisers (Dido, Pan Asian, the Atlantas. Wooster and Minotaur). Now, I like my proposal better because A, its mine, and B, it gives a real easy indication for CV's what ships they absolutely have to watch out for. with mouses proposal even something like a farragut could be beefed up to be a AA ship that outperforms same tier BB's and that feels wrong. at least all of these are ships with AA in mind when they were designed.
  15. A while ago, just over a year in fact, I posted a proposal for a line of Royal Navy AA cruisers. These ships would have been dedicated AA ships that used smoke and defensive AA fire against aircraft, and would have had low caliber guns for their tier as a offset. And then, WG put that line into the game. Sure, they made it pan Asian and only used one of the ships I wanted, but the flavor was implemented. This leaves me with a lot of ships that I want in the game not in the game and my proposed playstyle already issued. So, its back to the drawing board. And after some doodling, I return with a whole new playstyle and a revamped lineup of RN AA Crusiers and attached premiums. In terms of the historical reasoning for this line, during the 2nd world war, Britain was one of two countries to go all in with the idea of creating surface ships with a main role of screening against air attacks, and the first one to come up with the idea. In all, a total of 25 ships were built or refit as AA cruisers for the Royal Navy, more than any other navy in the world. These ships would serve from the beginning of the war, taking part in numerous surfaces actions, sometimes heavily outgunned, but punching far above their weight. At the end of the European theater, the Kriegsmarine would formally surrender on one of these vessels. Gameplay wise, there is a slight call for these ships to be added, with the feeling of CV’s being broken, perhaps a measure to help correct that. Really this is like a band-aid on a bullet wound, but a series of ships with noticeable AA advantages over their peers would be nice. Apart from that, the gameplay need is simple, new content to keep people engaged. So before we get into the individual ships of the line, we need to get into the characteristics of the line. The Feel of the Line. There are a lot of characteristics to this line that will be dictated by the characteristics of the historical ships in the line, and from here the remaining characteristics are added to flow with that established flavor. 1. These ships are small in comparison to other ships of their class and tier, this comes with the advantages of having best or near best in tier concealment, as well as best in tier or near best in tier agility, but at the detriment of having worst in tier or near worst in tier HP pools. 2. These ships have uninspiring armor, worse even than the British light cruisers. 3. The ships main battery are dual purpose mounts, and there is no secondary battery. They will have shorter range and are smaller in caliber than nearly every other cruiser gun in game. 4. The ships long range AA is going to be best in tier. This is where most of the AA firepower comes from. The flak will usually have the longest range in tier, and the flak bursts will typically be the highest damage in tier. 5. These ships are not particularly fast, in fact in many cases they are quite slow for a cruiser. So those are the historical constraints, and they already take care of the guts of the lines character. Now what needs to be filled in are any specific traits from the box of gimmicks to flesh things out. As far as this line specific traits, I have in mind a few. These traits being. 1. The ships have the RN CL acceleration, like the recently added Dido. This and their already short turning radius's and pretty good rudder shift times make them very easy to chuck around and dodge incoming fire. They will need this ability. 2. This is the big one. With alternate fire modes being added, pressing the 3 key gives you a new type of shell attached to a new type of firing mode. This shell will be called the VT shell. In this case, VT stands for variable timed fuse shell and this shell, and the combined firing mode will be what makes these ships exceptional AA ships. How it works will be as follows. When you select the 3 key your ships main guns will reload to the VT shells and the camera will enter a special ‘director view’ that is similar to the zoomed in gun view from below. When in this mode, the ship does not create its own flak bursts, these are now replicated by the VT shells. In the director view, the player aims the main battery guns at the enemy (the main battery guns still use the same traverse, elevation, and reload rates as they do against surface ships) gets the lead on the target correct, fires, and waits for the shells to cross the planes trajectory. Once the shells are as near to the enemy planes as possible, they explode as a flak burst. If they miss the planes and never get within burst range, they explode at the max range of the outer AA aura. Standard flight times and arcs are included, and give the aircraft a visual indicator that they are under fire before the shells hit. Further, the amount of fire that the ship can put up against the planes now depends on the angle of the ship to the planes, for example with Dido only 3 turrets contribute against aircraft dead ahead, 4 against aircraft between 20 ish and 50 ish degrees off the bow, the full battery between 50 and 140 degrees, and only 2 between 140 ish and 180 degrees off the bow. This means that the AA ship must maneuver to ensure they can put the maximum firepower up against aircraft, and cannot engage surface ships at the same time. What they get in return is the ability to actually have the flak clouds work to their full potential. If you have ever been in a training room or Co-op game and engaged a squadron you probably noticed that they die pretty quickly because they just fly right into the flak. With this manual fire mode, the possibility of hitting the enemy player with accurate flak and destroying his squadron outright is on the menu. It does cost more player involvement, but the capability against aircraft increased. Now, people may be saying that that’s all well and good against aircraft, but what about all those non-cv matches? Well, the VT-shells will have a secondary surface capability as well. Against surface targets, the VT shells do the following. They have reduced penetration by 25% threshold (Ex, 5.25 shells penetrate 22mm of armor natively, with the VT Fused shells, this is 16mm of armor. if they have IFHE, this gets bumped up to 20mm) . They have reduced damage They have a reduced fire chance They do increased module damage They have a larger HE damage radius They airburst as near the target as possible While it may look like this is not a good trade the airbursting will allow more shells to do damage to the target than a typical HE salvo where a few shells miss due to the RNG. Also the increased module damage can strip the target of AA, torpedoes, guns, and mobility quicker than even regular HE salvos. These factors should make the VT shells deadly for any destroyers or light cruisers that get too close. Finally, there is the question of what consumables would be used. I propose that these ships should have Defensive AA, Repair party, and Radar from T8 and up. So there we go. In general, this is how the line would feel. Now to the individual ships. Ships of the Line Tier 3: The C class AA Cruiser. This is the AA ship that started it all. With the ships on hand and obsolete, the Royal Navy decided to do a refit after the Italian invasion of Abyssinia (Ethiopia) in 1935. The Italians had a large air force at this point, and the Royal Navy in the Mediterranean would have to deal with them. Thus, there were 3 series of refits to the C class cruisers to make them AA ships. The first two converted, Coventry and Curlew, had 10 single 4 inch cannons and 2 octuple pompoms. However, the standard outfit was 8 of the dual 4-inch mounts that are ubiquitous on British cruisers, as well as a single quad pom-pom and a pair of quad Vickers 50 cals. This would be the A hull for this ship. The B-hull would be the refit applied to HMS Colombo, being 3 of the dual 4-inch mounts, 2 twin 40mm bofors, and 14 20mm cannons arranged in 6 dual mounts and a pair of singles. Tier 4: The Proposed D class Cruiser AA refit. As a part of the AA cruiser refits, it was decided that the similarly obsolete but larger D class cruisers would get a slightly larger and better laid out version of the C class AA refit. These would be armed with 4 twin 4.5 in turrets (similar to the secondary battery of Ark Royal), a quadruple pom pom, and the 2 quad 50 cal Vickers guns. as below, but lose the aft pom pom and replace the 20mm cannons at the stern, behind x turret, and on the wing deck with a smaller amount of quad vickers guns, i'm thinking 4. B hull is as below, exactly as is. This means 3 quad pom poms, and 9 single 20mm mounts. This can be adjusted, but shows the general look and changes between hulls. Tier 5: Charybdis HMS Chardybis was a Dido class cruiser but modified to meet the urgent requirements of war. She and Scylla were modified from the standard dido design to use 4.5-inch turrets originally made for the proposed D class AA cruisers, just because they were on hand and the ships could be completed much faster than waiting for the proper 5.25-inch mounts. Charybdis would have the 4 twin 4.5 inch cannons, as well as 2 triple torpedo tubes, 2 quad pom-poms, and 8 20mm. b hull would add 10 more 20mms. Tier 6: Cleopatra… or Argonaut… or Euraylus With the lead ship of the class in game as a premium, I have decided to add in one of the more famous Didos as the in branch representation of the class. The reason I’m picking between these three ships is due to the differences in the A and B hulls. A hull will have mediocre short range AA but the full 5 turrets of 5.25 inch, while B hull will have the refits where they were reduced to 4 main turrets, but with much improved mid and short range AA. As a note, these ships would have a reload of 6 seconds on their guns, basically having the firepower of Didos original stats, but without the smoke screen that justified their nerfing. Tier 7: Diadem One of the improved Didos (Bellona subclass), this ship is a Dido with better concealment, better torpedoes, improved 5 second reload, faster turret traverse by a factor of 2, and much improved mid and short range AA. The B hull will be Diadem fitted out as she was just before being transferred to Pakistan as PNS Babur, with a unified mid-range AA armament of 40mm bofors. Tier 8, cruiser proposal M1 One of the proposed 1943 light cruisers. Armed with 3 twin 5.25in turrets with improved gun and mounting, 6 dual 40mm mounts, 8 dual 20mm, and 2 quad torpedo launchers. Envision a chunky Lightning. The initial mount would have a reload of 5 seconds, but B hull gets access to the proposed Mk IV mounting with autoloader, and has a 3 second reload. Also, the ship is pretty darn slow at 29 knots initially, only going up to 30 with the improved horsepower. There are literally no pictures of this thing. Tier 9: Cruiser proposal N2: The other proposed 1943 light cruiser. Armed with 4 dual 5.25 in turret like m1, with 8 dual 40mm mounts and 12 dual 20mm mounts, as well as 2 quad torpedo launchers. Initially this ship also goes 29 knots, and has the 5 second reload turrets. Fully upgraded N2 would have 2 quad launchers per side, be capable of 30 knots, and have the 3 second reload MK IV mounts. Tier 10: Her Majesty's Ship The Future: This is the ship proposed by @Lord_Magus and its pretty crazy. This is Sketch A of the 1960 cruiser, named so because the admiralty was convinced that in 1948 when they drew it that it would not be possible to make until 1960. It uses 4 of the very experimental N1 5"/70 cannons, with a proposed shell weight of 70 pounds, muzzle velocity of 1036 m/s, and maximum fire rate of 66 rounds per minute! This design has some pros, its a dual purpose gun ship, that would be new, would be a AA cruiser, and with a crazy low profile would fit in with the line to a good degree. Also, the 2 quad torp launchers per side scale well with the launchers on N2 . The cons are the guns. At 127mm they would not benefit the same way that the 5.25 inch guns would from IFHE and thus the commander skills for this ship would be different from the rest of the line. More importantly, its crazy guns would be weird to balance. The High muzzle velocity would change the playstyle, not to mention the firing rate would need to be nerfed and the shell characteristics are wacky (the AP shell is basically SAP as specified, penetrating 1 inch of armor at "minimum striking velocity's and angles of 50 degrees" and having a bursting charge of 5 lbs, compared to the 6 inch cannons 3.75) this ship would be interesting to implement. Premium ships! Tier 5, HMS Delhi: Imagine a Fletcher, but with worse concealment, no torpedoes, slower, and with a citadel. Tier 6: Sirius A premium for the RN Cl line. It being a Dido class I put it here, but gameplay wise it would be 100% RN CL. Originally I had proposed this at Tier 7, but with Dido at tier 6 Sirius should be down tiered as such. Tier 6: Scylla Being a Dido class I put this here, but it has little to do gameplaywise with the RN AA Cl’s. I have a full writeup here. Premium at tier 8: K25F A paper design during the process of designing Fiji, has 8 of the twin 5.25in cannons. Would be a higher tier captain trainer. Premium at tier 8: RN 1951 emergency cruiser A proposed wide hulled Bellona with 4 of the 4.5 inch cannons of Daring and modernized FCS. I have a writeup of it here.