Search the Community

So... When """Rekt-xington"""" Starts to "Rekt"? Barely apart from being called ""best CV"", i only see """rekt-xingtons""" just being almost useless on my games, both enemies and allies...

The title is pretty self explanatory. After grinding down the American cv line from Langley I have finally aquired the Blue Ghost. I have upgraded the bombers and have a 4 point captain now along with researching the torpedo bombers, my question is what planes should I spec or should I follow jack of all trades that American carriers, what captain skills and ship upgrades should I get, and are there any need to know tips on lex that I didn’t learn on ranger.

Lexington-class battlecruiser I think this would be a very exciting option for a tier V-VII American Battleship. Here is a little info about it. Final Design SpecificationsDisplacement: 44,638 tons full load; 51,217 tons emergency full loadDimensions: 874 x 105 x 31 feet/266.5 x 32.1 x 9.5 metersPropulsion: Turbo-electric, 16 295 psi boilers, 4 shafts, 180,000 shp, 33.25 knotsCrew: 1297 (1326 as flagship)Armor: 7 inch belt, 1.5-1.75 inch deck, 5-9 inch barbettes, 5-11 inch turrets, 6-12 inch CTArmament: 4 dual 16"/50cal, 16 single 6"/53cal, 4 single 3"/50cal AA, 4 21 inch torpedo tubes (above water), 4 21 inch torpedo tubes (submerged) Concept/Program: A group of six large battlecruisers ordered in 1916 as fast "battle scouts", part of a large program of fleet scouting ships, which included many smaller cruisers and destroyers. These ships were essentially scaled up from contemporary cruiser designs, rather than scaled down from battleship designs, as was typical foreign practice. The ships would have been large and powerful, but poorly protected and thus vulnerable in battle. By 1921 the weaknesses of the design, and of the type in general, were apparently recognized, and consideration was given to either converting some of the ships to aircraft carriers or building new carriers using materials assembled for the battlecruisers. Ultimately all six were cancelled under the Washington Treaty, and two were completed as carriers. Class: Sometimes identified as the Constellation class, apparently because Constellation (CC 2) was the first to be laid down. These were the only US Navy ships to which the battlecruiser classification was applied. The designation "CC", which was not formally applied until the 17 July 1920 fleet redesignation, is thought to have been derived from "Cruiser, Capital", indicating their status as capital ships. Design: The original (1916) design for these ships was quite different from their final design. In 1916 the planned specifications were: 36,350 tons full load with 10 14"/50cal and 18 5"/51cal guns, very light armor, half of the 24 boilers located above the protective deck, and seven funnels. The entire program was suspended in 1917 to facilitate construction of merchant ships for WWI service. The class was completely redesigned 1917-1919, taking into account improved technology such as watertube boilers, foreign development of more powerful ships, the need for improved armor and anti-torpedo protection, and the lessons of Jutland. The resulting design was considerably better than the original version, but still relatively lightly armored. Why should the Lexington Battlecruiser be in the game as a regular ship and what historical and game play benefits does it add? The Lexington was meant to be part of the greatest battle fleet that never existed. This battle fleet was to consist of 6 ships of the South Dakota’s class with 4 triple mount 16.5” guns, 4 ships of the Colorado Class with 16” guns, 6 ships of the Lexington Class battle cruiser with 4 triple mount 14” guns, followed up by another nine battle ships from the Nevada, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, and California classes with 14” guns. This Battle fleet would have been superior to any single battle fleet in the world, including the one ran by the Royal Navy. This fleet was never built due to the limitations of the 1922 Washington Naval Treaty that put a limit on the total tonnage of the Battle Fleets for the US Britain Japan, France and Italy. For the British this treaty was about not being out paced by the economic and industrial might of the US and it’s planned battle fleet it was building, for the US it was about limiting the size of the Japanese fleet to a manageable level to maintain control of the pacific. Given the fact that these ships were never able to be built how cool would it be to be able to play what could have been. The Lexington was not just a paper ship it was actually on order and partially built when it and its sister ship were converted to aircraft carriers the Lexington and Saratoga which went on to play significate roles in WWII. Another important factor for the Lexington being added is the many design changes and the different upgrades that can be associated with the ship class. “Like the South Dakota-class battleships also included in the 1916 Act, their construction was repeatedly postponed in favor of escort ships and anti-submarine vessels. During these delays, the class was redesigned several times; they were originally designed to mount ten 14-inch guns and eighteen five-inch guns on a hull with a maximum speed of 35 knots (65 km/h; 40 mph), but by the time of the definitive design, these specifications had been altered to eight 16-inch guns and sixteen six-inch guns, with a speed of 33.25 knots (61.58 km/h; 38.26 mph) to improve hitting power and armor (the decrease in speed was mostly attributed to the additions of armor).” Here Are just a Few of the Different looks from the redesigns With the level of design and redesign the sheer amount of historical documentation on this ships class would be massive, which could support the high level of historical accuracy of any WG recreation. The Lexington was order as a direct response to the Japanese Kongo Battle cruiser (which may be in the game). The design of the Lexington was heavily based on and an improvement of Britain Invincible class battle cruiser, which will most likely be added to the Britain line. Hopefully if we can get enough people interested in the Lexington Battlecruiser War Gaming seriously considering add this amazing ship.

Thanks in large part to @Shrayes_Bhagavatula and his recent (And frankly well done) German BB split proposal, I have been thinking about Battlecruisers once again and how such lines or line splits would shape up in the game. In particular, Sharayes' 'Raider Line' of German Battleships, at least IMO, would potentially pair well with earlier, true BC's to create not just a split but a true 2nd line of battleships to unlock for Germany. His top tier conclusions meant that one would only need to backfill down to tier III in order to complete a line, and since there are more than enough ship classes from the era to do so, a BC-->fast/ commerce raiding BB line suddenly becomes very attainable... at least in theory of course. But today, I'd like to start my suggestion with a different nation to backfill BCs with; the US. As we know, there will be an imminent split at tier 8 for the USN Battleship tree, and like many of you I was shocked and a bit disappointed when the ships were announced and shown off a few months ago. "This isn't at all what I wanted!" I exclaimed! "Where's the Nevada, the Tennessee, the real SoDak? Where's our awesome secondary focused, brawling BBs!?!?" Instead what we got was the original South Dakota, a rebuilt, pretend-to-be-a-Montana South Dakota, and one of the freakin' Tillman proposals! Not to say that such ships didn't have their fans prior to the announcement, they most certainly did! Even I'll freely admit I was hoping to see the OG SoDak come into the game at some point as a premium or, something. However, as I calmed down and started to think about it more, it's actually kind of brilliant on WG's part. We have always had a very nice, well put together tech line for the US BBs from a chronological standpoint. Starting from the first Dreadnought, to the standards, to the post 1930 era Fast BBs all the way up to the aborted Montana, it's a very well defined line! And now, we're going to be given a choice: what was versus what might have been. The simple fact is that the 1920 South Dakota-class was the next in line to be built after the Colorado-class and very nearly were, if not for that contemptable piece of paper known as the Washington Naval Treaty. Now, say what you will about the new ships, and they very well could end up being crap as many of the doomsayers are proclaiming, but there's no denial that these new "Super Standards" as I call them, will not only create a more interesting chronological line but also a more significant gameplay choice: continue with the slow, methodical playstyle of the standards or go with fast, maneuverable BBs? And therein lies the brilliance... So if you made it this far, congratulations! If you're looking for the TL:DR well here's your question: 'What the hell does all that have to do with American Battlecrusiers TW?' So glad you asked! Despite the fact that the USN fast BBs make chronological sense in the techline, it got me thinking; can it be extended and make sense gameplay wise? This is where the BC's come in. Since we already have existing tier VIII-X ships, we simply need to backfill the rest of the line as far as it can go. And how far does the BC line for the US go? Lets theorycraft! Starting off at tier VII, we have the most obvious ship to place in our hypothetical American BC line: The Lexington-class: As we all know, the Lexington and Saratoga were rebuilt as CV's so I would go with the name Constellation for this class in the techline. The main feature of these ships are that they are basically the ultimate glass cannons. Roughly the same size and maneuverability as HMS Hood (though slightly faster), Connie would also feature similar armament to Colorado, with 8x2 16" guns though these are the 50cal versions that were also to be used on the original SoDaks (nee: Kansas) Her main drawback is that this thing, other than being huge has only 7"(!) of main belt armor. That's only slightly better than a Baltimore and compared to Hood is equivalent to only her upper belt, whereas her main belt is 12". So yeah, you want to talk about easy broadside citadels, Russian BBs eat your hearts out! And it's this frankly jarring achilles heel that have some saying is the reason the Connie will never show up in the game, she's simply to fragile to to balance properly. But I argue she could be balanced, especially given a hypothetical refit that WG would certainly give her anyway, could make her perfectly competitive at tier VII, playing more like... a long range heavy cruiser rather than a true BB. Now at this point, many people would say "yeah, that'll work. Branch her off from the New Mexico and call it a day!" But Wait! we can still go further down the line! Just like a archeological expedition, we just need to dig a little deeper and get to tier VI where we find: Welcome to the original Lexington-class designs. The drawings you see above are the ships as they had been designed by 1916, only for the design parameters to change the following year into the ships that actually got laid down in 1920. Instead of 8x2 16" guns she was to be fitted with 10 14"/50 guns in a superfiring arrangement of 3 over 2, like the Pensacola-class CA. And just like her contemporary at tier VI, her armor is devastatingly thin at only 5" at the belt. Let me repeat that: FIVE. INCHES. It's the same armor thickness as the New Orleans at tier VII, in a ship four times it's size. Now, this does mean that she has an insane top speed of 35(!) knots, but even so. This is a ship of yuuuuge extremes. And just like her big sister a tier higher would likely mean the ship wouldn't play like a BB at all, more like a giant CA with 20% less firepower than the New Mexico. Oh gods I hear you say, make it stop! Surely there can't be more! Oh but there is... digging a little deeper still, we find: This ship was the culmination of a design study that had begun around 1911-12 in response to the IJN Kongo and in many ways was exactly that, an American rebuttal design meant to offer similar capabilities. And as you can see, this ship is rather... reasonable in design when compared to the insanity that becomes the Lexington-class project. Main armament was only 8x2 14" guns, these likely would have been the 45cal ones since they were just coming online at the time, so again about 20% less firepower than it's contemporary BB at tier V, the New York-class. They also feature... reasonable-ish armor protection as well, with a 10" armor belt as seen above. Overall, this ship is entirely sensible compared to what comes next. But is there anything that comes before? Can we go even deeper? Yes, yes we can. This drawing is based on a series of general requirements that had been drawn up by the Naval Design Bureau from about 1909 to design a battlecruiser, using the Wyoming-class as a base. 6 different design sketches were submitted and the end result was what you see above. Congress was never interested in authorizing any money to the Navy to build such ships, only changing their tune when the Kongo-class was revealed to the world. The main armament would be the same 12"/50 guns as on the Wyomings for those wondering. At this point we've pretty much hit rock bottom. I could continue this even further with Armored Cruisers, which were the true precursors to the battlecruiser but as there are no AC's in WoWs yet, that's a story that'll have to wait for another time. Hopefully soon... ;) Congratulations! You made it through the entire rant! I hope you found this interesting and as always, I welcome your feedback and suggestions!

INTRODUCTION I know there have been posts in the past about adding the Lexington-class CC into the game. However, the latest I have seen was in 2016. There may be an a more recent one that I missed, but I really wanted to write this and get it off of my chest. Also, this is more of a love letter to folks at Wargaming who have created a game that, for most of my life, I wished had existed. It’s hard to find good plane fun Naval games these days. So hats off to Wargaming for making one. Also, if I made an error, I apologize and be sure to kindly let me know. SHORT BACKSTORY OF THE SHIP Alrighty then, my ship suggestion. You can probably tell by the title what I have in mind, that being the Lexington-class battlecruisers of the United States Navy. In brief, these were supposed to be the USN’s first trip down the path of the battlecruiser. However, the Washington Naval Treaty prevented this and they were cancelled before completion, save for two, Lexington and Saratoga. The two ships would be converted into the first fleet carriers oof the USN and the rest is history. The Saratoga can be played in game as a Tier 8 carrier of the USN CV line. And yes, it is actually the Saratoga, she’s just called the Lexington because that’s the class name. WHY I AM WRITING THIS I have always been fascinated by what ifs and alternate timelines, probably because I grew up with lots of Star Trek in my house, but one that has always caught my attention is the Lexington-class battlecruiser. They were to be fast with little armor and a powerful main battery and secondary battery. I know I’m not alone when I say that I would really like to see this ship in World of Warships as a premium ship, or a member of a USN CC, or battlecruiser, line NAME AND TEIR In older posts about the Lexington battlecruiser for WoWS, a few things always pop up. Namely, what should it be called and what tier should it be at? So below are my suggestions for these two problems. Name: Lexington CC Tier: T7 For the name I went with Lexington CC as that’s really what it is. It’s the Lexington but in its battlecruiser, or CC, form. The CC comes from the designation that USN battlecruisers would have been given had they’d been completed as such. Note: BC is not an official mnemonic designation. As for the tier, I went with T7 for multiple reasons that I Hope will become apparent as I talk about my various ideas. STATS (BEFORE CANCELLATION) Bellow are some basic stats of the original design and layout of the Lexington CC as she was being constructed with at the time of her cancellation in 1922. Armament: 8x 16”/50 main guns in 4 twin turrets 14x 6”/53 secondary guns in 4 single open mounts and 10 single mount casemates around her superstructure. 8x 21in torpedo tubes. 4 below the waterline on the bow and two above on the stern. 8x 3”/50 AA guns in single mounts across the ship. Speed: 35kts Armor: Main Belt- 7in tapering to 5in at the bow and stern Deck- 2.5in with 4.5 over the magazines Turret Face- 11in Turret Sides and Back- 6in Turret Roof- 5in Barbettes- 9in Conning Tower- 12in POSSIBLE DESIGN 1 (1920s) My first idea for Lexington CC’s existence in WoWS is simply have her as she was designed to be. Nothing more and nothing less. Of course this is the least fun and honestly my least favorite option as it doesn’t present anything new and interesting with the ship. Also, there are some glaring weaknesses with this design. Since some things aren’t necessarily good or bad, I made a neutral section. WHAT’S DIFFERENT FROM THE ORIGINAL DESIGN? In short, nothing. It’s the same ship. GOODS, NEUTRALS, AND BADS Good: Speed- She’s fast. Damn fast for a 45,000 ton warship of the 1920s. Armament- She’s got some heavy guns. Her secondaries are not bad either. The 6”/53 gun was used aboard the Omaha-class scout cruiser as its main armament. So, these should have some range to them to keep cruisers and destroyers away from her thin armor. I will simply ignore the torpedoes as submerged fixed mounted torpedoes do not seem exist in the game. Acceleration: Being outfitted with a turboelectric drive system, the Lexingtons, both CC and CV, could get up and go quickly, both forward and in reverse. Neutral: Accuracy- Her accuracy would not be bad as she would have had some of the best fire control systems the USN had at that time. Then again, it wouldn’t be great with the lack of radar assisted range finding and targeting. View Range: She has “meh” view range due to older optics and again, no radar. Bad: Armor- Anyone could see this from a mile away. Maneuverability- Being such a long ship would make her sluggish. Not Yamato levels of sluggish, probably a little less responsive than Hood. Poorly Protected Engines- Because half of her boilers are unprotected by the citadel it would be easy to disable her engines, if you can hit her, which shouldn’t be too hard. She is big. Detection: Because she’s such a large ship, she would have a relatively high detection range. Torpedo Protection: She’s a ship from the 1920s, a time when torpedoes hadn’t yet reached their full potential and where not as powerful as they would become. Anti-Air: With only eight 3”/50s for AA defense, she’s not going to be able to protect herself well from enemy aircraft. Combine this with her weak torpedoes protection and sluggish response, she’s an XP punching bag for carriers if she’s alone. POSSIBLE DESIGN 2 (1941-A) This one is the one I most often think about when I imagine seeing Lexington CC in the game and the one I hope to see in game in the end. WHAT’S DIFFERENT FROM THE ORIGINAL DESIGN? It’s a theoretical design that shows Lexington CC having been refitted in the 1930s and modernized along the same lines as the battleships of the USN. Subtractions: -8x 3”/50 AA Guns -8x 21in torpedo tubes -4x 6”/53 Open mounts -2kts in speed Additions: +10x 5”/25 AA Guns in single mounts +24x 1.1”/75 AA Guns in 6 Quad Mounts +22x .50 M2 BMG water cooled AA guns +Catapult Scout Plane GOODS, NEUTRALS, AND BADS Goods Speed: Even though she’s lost 2 kts, she’s still fast at 33kts. Armament- She still carries her main Battery. Her secondaries have been trimmed by 4 from 14 to 10, but they can still defend her close in. Acceleration: As mentioned earlier, being outfitted with a turboelectric drive system, the Lexingtons, both CC and CV, could get up and go quickly, both forward and in reverse. Accuracy: With the inclusion of radar, her accuracy would increase, making her decent at long range. Scout Plane: Increases effective range of the guns. Neutral: Improved AA- Although her AA has vastly improved, it will still struggle against higher tier aircraft carriers. At least she’s no longer a give me. View Range: While her view range would be better with the addition of radar, she would still struggle to see targets outside the max range of her guns, but with the assistance of friendly ships spotting ahead, she could see them. Torpedo Protection: With the addition of torpedo bulges along her hull, Lexington CC is no longer as severely vulnerable against torpedoes, but is still susceptible to major damage from the most powerful torpedoes. Bad: Armor- It’s still thin. Maneuverability- Being such a long ship would make her sluggish. However, with the slight reduction in speed, she is more responsive, but still not good. Poorly Protected Engines- Because half of her boilers are unprotected by the citadel, it would be easy to disable her engines, if you can hit her, which shouldn’t be too hard. She is big. Also, the armor is still thin. Detection: Because she’s such a large ship, she would have a relatively high detection range. POSSIBLE DESIGN 3 (1941-B) This one is the same as the 1941-A design except she has more armor, is a little slower, and a little more maneuverable. WHAT’S DIFFERENT FROM THE ORIGINAL DESIGN? It’s a theoretical design that shows Lexington CC having been refitted in the 1930s and modernized along the same lines as the battleships of the USN. Subtractions: -8x 3”/50 AA Guns -8x 21in torpedo tubes -4x 6”/53 Open mounts -5kts in speed Additions: +10x 5”/25 AA Guns in single mounts +24x 1.1”/75 AA Guns in 6 Quad Mounts +22x .50 M2 BMG water cooled AA guns +Catapult Scout Plane +3 Inches of Belt Armor GOODS, NEUTRALS, AND BADS Goods Armament- She still carries her main Battery. Her secondaries have been trimmed by 4 from 14 to 10, but they can still defend her close in. Acceleration: As mentioned earlier, being outfitted with a turboelectric drive system, the Lexingtons, both CC and CV, could get up and go quickly, both forward and in reverse. Accuracy: With the inclusion of radar, her accuracy would increase, making her decent at long range. Scout Plane: Increases effective range of the guns. Neutral: Speed: With 5kts gone, she drops to 30kts which takes away a lot of makes the ship so impressive. Not a bad speed, but certainly not as good as it could be. Improved AA- Although her AA has vastly improved, it will still struggle against higher tier aircraft carriers. At least she’s no longer a give me. View Range: While her view range would be better with the addition of radar, she would still struggle to see targets outside the max range of her guns, but with the assistance of friendly ships spotting ahead, she could see them. Torpedo Protection: With the addition of torpedo bulges along her hull, Lexington CC is no longer as severely vulnerable against torpedoes, but is still susceptible to major damage from the most powerful torpedoes. Armor- With an added 3 inches of armor to the belt, the Lexington CC now has 10 inches of armor tapering to 7-8 at her bow and stern. Marginally Better Protected Engines- Because of the increased armor, her engines are not as easy to take out, however it is still a problem Bad: Maneuverability- Being such a long ship would make her sluggish. However, with a greater reduction in speed, she is even more responsive, and is ok-ish but still bad-ish. Detection: Because she’s such a large ship, she would have a relatively high detection range. TYPE OF PLAY STYLE With the type of ship she is and her relative lack of armor and high speed, she’s not a brawler and would probably be better as a sniper, a really fast sniper. She could also support cruisers by assisting in taking out other cruisers. Oddly enough this is basically what the ship was meant to do in the USN. Lead scouting forces and bring heavy weight fire power to a cruiser fight. So she’d be good at kiting behind cruisers and slamming on cruisers and the occasional battleships and then speeding away before they can respond effectively. MY OPINIONS So, as you can imagine, I’m not a huge fan of the first design. Especially if it’s supposed to be T7 and I honestly feel that it should be a T6. However, some people gasp when that’s mentioned. Apparently putting a light skinned meh gunned fast battlecruiser at T6 will break the game. Not sure how that would happen, but everyone is entitled to their own opinions. Anyhow, that’s where I stand on the first design. If it’s added into the game, great! I’ll still love the Lady Lex. As for the second design, I already mentioned that I find it the most appealing. It keeps the thin armor that Lexington CC is infamously known for, but in doing so, it keeps her play style up. This combined with her relatively still high speed of 32kts would make a decent battlecruiser at T7 alongside H.M.S. Hood. Her maneuverability wouldn’t be great, but it wouldn’t be terrible. Her guns would be accurate enough to rain Hell from long range. This one is a good fit for T7 Now, for the final design. It is what it is. It’s the second design but with more armor, a lower speed, and is more maneuverable. I’m honestly indifferent about it. I would say it could be a T8, but that AA and still relatively thin armor and reduced speed of 30kts would make it a pain. Especially if she had to see T10 and T9s every game. MUST HAVES In my opinion there are somethings that the Lexington CC needs to have if she is going to be a playable, enjoyable, and viable ship to play. Most of these things are to compensate for her lack of armor. She must have good guns. They are going to need to hit hard, hit far, and be accurate enough to not force the Lexington CC into close in engagements where her armor is weaker than it already is. Secondly, she must be fast. The whole purpose of her lack of armor was so she would be fast. Not that it really needed to be said, but there. She’s going to need a large HP pool. This, as with her speed and guns is because of her lack of armor. Also, she’s a big ship with lots of room for lots of HP. Good Consumables. This is kind of a give me, but I’ll mention it anyways. She’s going to need to good consumables. This (cue broken record) is because of her lack of armor. This last one is a maybe, but I encourage it. Secondaries with good range. These are not the typical 5”/51, 5”/25, or 5”/38 secondaries of the USN battleships and cruisers, no these are 6”/53s. These are the exact same guns that the Omaha-class scout cruisers are armed with. In fact when the Lexingtons were cancelled, their 6” secondaries were used for the guns of the Omahas. So yeah, these should have some rang and Lexington CC is going to need them to have range because of her weak armor. Those are my must haves. As you can probably tell, her biggest weakness is her armor. Plain and simple. CONCLUSION Well, this wraps up this ship suggestion of mine. Thanks for trudging your way through my poorly structured paragraphs. I hope you enjoyed reading this or at the very least were humored by it. Either way, have a wonderful day and see you on the high seas. Disclaimer: Any mention of radar in this post is not a reference to the radar consumable. It’s just a real world reason as to why view range and accuracy gets better. P.S. Wargaming, if you do read this, I beg of you to please, for the love of all those who appreciate naval history, do not give this ship a strange made up camouflage pattern. Giver her that beautiful “Neutrality Grey” or Navy Grey and don’t cover her in rust. I think she would look stunning in such a beautiful clean paint job and equally clean hull.

Well, the model has arrived and the photos are in from SD Model Makers. She is 30” long, so just under 1:350 scale. Something like 1:34896 or whatever. For those of you who don’t know, the Lexington -class aircraft carrier, or CV, was originally supposed to be a battlecruiser, or CC. The model is is being built in a configuration that suggests what she might have looked like as a CC in USN service in early 1941. ARMAMENT: x8 16”/50 main guns. x10 6”/53 secondary guns. x10 5”/25 heavy AA guns. x6 1.1”/75 “Chicago Piano” medium AA guns. x19 Water cooled M2 .50 caliber BMG light AA guns. Enjoy! P.S. This is an article I made a while back about having this ship added into WoWS. Check it out if you like the Lady Lex.

Well, the preliminary photos are in from SD Model Makers. Some additions and alterations still need to be done, but she is coming along nicely. She is 30” long, so just under 1:350 scale. Something like 1:34896 or whatever. For those of you who don’t know, the Lexington -class aircraft carrier, or CV, was originally supposed to be a battlecruiser, or CC. The model is is being built in a configuration that suggests what she might have looked like as a CC in USN service in early 1941. ARMAMENT: x8 16”/50 main guns. x10 6”/53 secondary guns. x10 5”/25 heavy AA guns. x6 1.1”/75 “Chicago Piano” medium AA guns. x19 Water cooled M2 .50 caliber BMG light AA guns. Enjoy!

Just bought lex yesterday. Does the default plane really that easy to shred ?

So, I'm currently in the process of free XP-ing the upgrades on the Lexington before I sell my Ranger and buy it, but I've come across a little bit of a dilemma. With the rocket planes, I have a choice between the regular HVAR rockets or the big Tiny Tim ones. I know what the advantages and disadvantages of both are, but I'm not sure which one to get. On one hand, there's lots of HVAR rockets which means I'm probably going to miss the tiny little DDs that I use my rocket planes on less often. On the other hand, the Tiny Tim rockets pack a huge punch, meaning that they'll do more damage on DDs and on the cruisers and BBs I occasionally have to use the rocket planes on. Because I'm caught in this conundrum, I thought I'd pose it to the rest of you: Which rocket planes do you think are better, the HVARs or the Tiny Tims? Thanks in advance to anyone who responds. Sincerely, 1Sherman.

Fair warning, this is not a serious proposal, as the entire line is paper, with the exclusion of the Iowa-Class. Also, from tier 4 through 8, all of the ships are either designs for the Lexington-Class or designs that lead to the early Lexington designs. For the most part, they'd be very responsive ships, able to accelerate to top speed and change course very quickly, compared to any other battleship or battle cruiser, but would pay dearly for that privilege, with the most heavily armored ship having 13 inches and with the weakest being a measly 6 inches (original plans called for 5). The citadels will also tend to be fairly high, and not all will be turtle backed, so making use of the quick acceleration and rudder shifting is the key to survival. Their play-style would be closer to oversized cruisers, rather than fast battleships, and misplays will be punished severely. This line is not for the faint of heart and would have a fairly steep learning curve. However, near paralleled mobility for ships of their firepower, they would be deadly in the right hands. It might also be good to give them relatively good turret traverse, at least better than similar armed battleships. Fake modernizations will be needed to help with their pitiful AA, though it might allow for a small boost in speed. Pros: Fast acceleration Responsive rudder High top speed Good guns Large health pools Lack of tall superstructures Might be overpenned a lot? Good firing angles on all turrets Cons: High and long citadel Weak belt Large size Consumable selection will be key, as they can make or break the line. I suggest that they get Vanguard's heal, or at least something similar, and they get it early. Or maybe an engine boost that significantly boosts acceleration and deceleration, but doesn't affect top speed? Tier IV Lexington (1912-B) Main Armament: 2x Double 356mm 14”/45 Mk I (fore, superfiring) 2x Double 356mm 14”/45 Mk I (aft, superfiring) Secondary Armament: 16x Single 6” Anti-Aircraft Armament: [Unknown] Displacement: 38,329 t Speed: 29 kts Belt: 254 mm Citadel: [Unknown] Length: 280.4 m Beam: 29.6 m Draft: 9.3 m A lightly armored but heavily armed ship, her high citadel and thin belt will come as a shock to those coming fresh from the South Carolina, though her high speed and big guns would hopefully offset some of her flaws. Ideally, I would have liked to start players at tier III, but I couldn't find a suitable 12-inch armed design, and while I am using a lot of paper, I don't want to resort to pure fantasy ships. However, the flip side is that it will still start players off at tier 4, which is less competitive than higher tiers, and the relatively small calibers that she'll we facing means that her armor deficient isn't as bad as it would be. She'll either be really fun or really painful. Tier V Lexington-145 (1915) Main Armament: 2x Double 356mm 14”/45 Mk I (fore, superfiring) 2x Double 356mm 14”/45 Mk I (aft, superfiring) Secondary Armament: 12x 6” Anti-Aircraft Armament: 4x 76mm 3” Displacement: 32,205 t Speed: 30 kts Belt: 152 mm Citadel: [Unknown] Length: 259 m (waterline) Beam: 30.5 m (waterline) Draft: 9.3 m While she has a thinner belt than her predecessor, Design 145 has significantly more internal armor, so while she'll take more penetrating hits, her internal armor might reduce the number of citadels. Might be better to swap with the tier IV. Tier VI Lexington-169 (1915) Main Armament: 1x Double 356mm 14”/45 Mk I (fore) 1x Triple 356mm 14”/45 Mk I (fore, superfiring) 1x Triple 356mm 14”/45 Mk I (aft, superfiring) 1x Double 356mm 14”/45 Mk I (aft) Secondary Armament: 2x Single 152mm 5” (port, conning tower, casemate) 2x Single 152mm 5” (starboard, conning tower, casemate) 3x Single 152mm 5” (port, midships superstructure, casemate) 3x Single 152mm 5” (straboard, midships superstructure, casemate) 2x Single 152mm 5” (port, aft, casemate) 2x Single 152mm 5” (straboard, aft, casemate) 2x Single 152mm 5” (port, midships superstructure, open) 2x Single 152mm 5” (straboard, midships superstructure, open) Anti-Aircraft Armament: [Unknown] Displacement: 30,390 t Speed: 35 kts Belt: 152 mm Citadel: [Unknown] Length: 259 m (waterline) Beam: 27.4 m (waterline) Draft: 9.2 m A slight increase in firepower over the previous two tiers, but a dramatic step up in terms of speed. Now with more funnels! Tier VII Lexington (1919-B) Main Armament: 2x Double 406mm 16”/45 (fore, superfiring) 2x Double 406mm 16”/45 (aft, superfiring) Secondary Armament: 5x Single 152mm 6” (port, midships superstructure, casemate) 5x Single 152mm 6” (starboard, midships superstructure, casemate) 2x Single 152mm 6” (port, midships superstructure, open) 2x Single 152mm 6” (starboard, midships superstructure, open) Anti-Aircraft Armament: [Unknown] Displacement: 40,826.3 t Speed: 33 kts Belt: 229 mm Citadel: Length: 259 m Beam: 30.2 m Draft: 9.3 m Losing 2 knots, 2 funnels, and 2 barrels, the B Scheme of 1919 gains better belt armor and now carries 16 inch guns. Tier VIII Lexington (1919-No. 1) Main Armament: 2x Double 406mm 16”/45 (fore, superfiring) 2x Double 406mm 16”/45 (aft, superfiring) Secondary Armament: 5x Single 152mm 6” (port, midships superstructure, casemate) 5x Single 152mm 6” (starboard, midships superstructure, casemate) 2x Single 152mm 6” (port, midships superstructure, open) 2x Single 152mm 6” (starboard, midships superstructure, open) Anti-Aircraft Armament: 4x 76mm 3” Displacement: 32024 t Speed: 35 kts Belt: 152 mm Citadel: Length: 259 m Beam: 28 m Draft: 9.6 m Losing armor to gain speed, she'd be the fastest 16-inch platform in the game. Don't know if 5 knots is worth 1/2 the belt of the alternate, though. Tier VIII -Alt- Lexington (1918-C) Main Armament: 2x Triple 406mm 16”/45 (fore, superfiring) 2x Triple 406mm 16”/45 (aft, superfiring) Secondary Armament: 8x Single 152mm 6” (port, midships superstructure, casemate) 8x Single 152mm 6” (starboard, midships superstructure, casemate) Anti-Aircraft Armament: [Unknown] Displacement: 48,080 t Speed: 30 kts Belt: 305 mm Citadel: Length: 262 m Beam: 32.3 m Draft: 9.6 m Slower than the other contender for the tier 8 spot, but with twice the belt and 50% more guns, she'd carry a very heavy armament for a ship as fast as her, and it also might do to increase her speed a bit to keep her equal to or greater than the French. She'll be able to overpower just about any cruiser at her tier, though she will need to stay at range when dealing with other battleships and battlecruisers. The 12 inch belt will be a welcome respite, allowing her to angle more effectively against other ships and make use of her good turret angles, she still suffers from a large and high citadel, so misjudging angles will prove costly. Tier IX Iowa-Class The Iowa-Class would be moved into this line, the only actually built ship in the entire line. Other than a change of location, I don't think there needs to be any change, Tier X Tilman-III Main Armament: 2x Triple 406mm 16”/50 (fore, superfiring) 2x Triple 406mm 16”/50 (aft, superfiring) Secondary Armament: [Unknown] Anti-Aircraft Armament: [Unknown] Displacement: 57,600 t Speed: 30 kts Belt: 330 Citadel: Length: 297 m Beam: 33 m Draft: 10 m I know the Tilman ships are a meme and were originally a trolling of Senator Tilman, but the design was still designed as if she were to be built. While most of the Tilmans would be overpowered, the Tilman-III is relatively tame, her belt is 3 inches lighter (and only an inch more than Iowa) to give her a designed speed of 30 knots to the Montana's 28. Since the Montana can do 30 knots in game, you could edge her speed up to 32-33 knots and make her engines and rudder a bit more responsive. Of course, the secondary and AA armament would have to get the USN WW2 treatment, ie stick a gun anywhere there's more than a square foot of deck space available (why the captains never got a pintle-mounted .50 cal, I'll never know. The Army got to have all the fun). In general, she would fit the style of the other American Battle Cruisers, except she's not made of glass. Since in this theoretical line would be taking Iowa for itself, a modernized South Dakota (1920) would be put in its place. She was similar, though lesser than Montana. Tier IX -Iowa Replacement- South Dakota (1920) Main Armament: 2x Triple 406mm 16”/50 (fore, superfiring) 2x Triple 406mm 16”/50 (aft, superfiring) Secondary Armament: [Unknown, Modernized] Anti-Aircraft Armament: [Unknown, Modernized] Displacement: 39,200 t Speed: 28 kts Belt: 343 Citadel: Length: 200 m Beam: 32 m Draft: 10 m

An exciting game against tier X. I would like to say that i don't face problems against tier X, unfortunately the truth is that it is very hard facing those powerful AA monsters , however i found the solution to many problems are to use the Tiny Tim rockets. Still this game doen't show big numbers in damage but shows what a T8 carrier can do vs tier X. Replay also uploaded if interested. 20190309_223120_PASA108-Lexington_23_Shards.wowsreplay

So after some decent grinding in Ranger, plus some lovely free EXP drops and some $$ spend on some doubloons, I am now in possession of USS Lexington. The remaining Free EXP was used to research & purchase the upgraded fighters. I took it into a Coop Battle (because I wouldn't DARE bring a stock Lexington into a Random, knowing I could go up against Tier X's and face off against a Shokaku or Enterprise, both likely far more effective and efficient captains than I am) and it was... underwhelming, to say the least. A meager 49K dmg. A game or two down the line and I pump out a 109K and 132K dmg game, but something just doesn't seem to click like it did with Ranger. She feels weak. She certainly looks the part of a heavyweight hitter, but sure as heck don't swing like one. I'm seeing my strike squadrons drop out of the sky like flies going up against the same ships I did with Ranger to generally good success, though I imagine this would improve with upgraded squadrons. (I have just about the same upgrades, and the same captain fully retrained.) And she costs an arm and a leg to just service, not even repair. 60,000 credits a battle to maintain, and with some games going so fast I hardly have time to build up damage numbers, and I make as little as 2,000 credits to losing upwards of 10,000. I don't know if I'm missing something or what, but I'm not exactly impressed with Lexington thus far. I'll give it much more time before I make final judgement though. I have only had it for a day after all. And it's not like I'm going to abandon the line or anything because I don't like one ship. I've made it this far, I want to go all the way. I've heard she's kinda weaker than her contemporaries (which is alarming, seeing as that's the story for pretty much every USN CV on the line. As far as I know the line gets "good" at Essex, and continues to Midway. That is, not totally outclassed by the IJN CV of the same tier). I dunno. Maybe she just takes some getting used to or something.