Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'cl'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Volunteer Programs
  • Feedback and Support
    • Game Support and Bug Reporting
    • Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Discord


Twitter


Website URL


Instagram


YouTube


Twitch


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 17 results

  1. One of the oldest lines in the game does not have a line split yet and its the Japanese cruisers and i propose a light cruiser line for them in essense its based on the mogami and the agano classes . most of the ships in this line are paper but that doesnt really stop wargaming from implementing them so this wont be as indepth as my other proposal. they are similar to american light cruisers in which they dont have to choose between defensive aa fire and hydro instead they have to choose between torpedo reload booster and defensive fire this line is for those who suffer from japanese cruiser syndrome and fire their torpedoes as soon as they get the chance. Traits: Good fire chance on main guns excellent torpedoes with reload booster from tier 5 excellent concealment low armor very maneuverable slow turret traverse High range Consumables hydro defensive aa fire /torpedo reload booster (tier 5+) spotting plane/fighter(tier 8 +) heal (tier8+) the torpedo reload booster is thirty seconds akin to monaghan from tier5 to 6 then from tier 7 to ten its 15 seconds. unlike american cruisers japanese cruisers were to do reconaisssance using their floatplanes so they start off with spotter planes instead of fighters as a consumable. Tier 4 : Sendai yes the line splits at tenryu I wanted to fit in another 5500 ton cruiser without up tiering it Same shabam as kuma floating citadel but with the single quadruple launchers it got in a refit as the only gameplay difference not much to say here Tier 5: Agano this is a queen elizabeth warspite situation her characteristics are the same as yahagi but with better dispersion and she trades engine boost for defensive aa or torpedo reload booster and swaps fighter with spotter Tier 6: Minase (Improved Agano) also known as the Kai Agano class the class was part of the 6th naval supplement plan from 1942 to build an extended version of the aganos who were lightly armed for their size slight increase in health ,detection and firepower from Agano and is quite similar to leander .The name minase was taken from one of the uncompleted sendai class cruisers who were re-planned to be the furutaka class. Tier 7 :Omono imagine Agano with mogamis 155mm turrets This ship is the preliminary design for agano where the ship was supposed to carry nine 155mm guns in three triple turrets . the turrets were too wide for the agano class' narrow bean so they were used to arm the yamato class battleships and oyodo instead. this version is a widened agano that could fit the turrets. so its slightly wider than agano being the same size as the tier before. the name Omono was taken from a river in Akita prefecture, Japan based on Japanese cruiser naming conventions. Tier 8: Chikugo complete fantasy version of improved Agano with 12 155mm guns just imagine the 155mm turrets on this. compared to the current 155mm mogami she gains 2 seconds less reload albeit ahistorical to be more competitive at high tier. The name Chikugo is from a river in Fukuoka Perfecture, Japan. Tier 9: Suzuya 155 mm mogami but uptiered As like Z-23 , Mogami loses the 155mm gun option which is replaced by the 203s and the upgrade for them increases the rate of fire. The turrets however are installed into suzuya who performs the same as the current 155mm Mogami but has a gun upgrade that drops it to the 8 seconds of the tier before. Tier 10: Sagami complete fantasy of a 155mm mogami with either quadruple turrets , an additional rear triple turret or faster firing dual or triple turrets the quadruple turret version reloads in 15 seconds, the additional turret version has 10 second reload still, the improved dual or triple versions cut the reload down to 6 seconds fot the triples and the duals 4 seconds. The name Sagami is from a river crossing the Kanagawa and Yamanashi prefectures in Japan. Premiums here are some unique japanese ships that would be premiums alonside what is already present Tier 3/4: Isuzu not much to say about it other than its armed with the same firepower as a kagero on a hull the size of two of them . tier 3 at best could be tier 4 with the torpedoes it had before they were removed Tier 5/6/7 : Oyodo did not want to put this in the tech tree as its unique and could fit at three different tiers depending on how its implemented: it fits at tier 5 in terms of vanilla armament, tier 6 if you give it both spotter and fighter at the same time and maybe tier 7 as a hybrid weird cruiser definitely hard to tier but it wouldn't be tech tree for sure Leave your thoughts below on this line
  2. The latest season of clan battles reminded of me the total lack of premium T9 non-super cruiser options. I mostly played in USS Alaska, which is not as good as it once was due to the loss of fire prevention. I find it curious that WG has not released any premium non-super cruisers at this tier. I consider T9 tech tree cruisers to be weak for their tier when compared to their T10 successors (e.g. USS Buffalo vs USS Des Moines), unlike several T9 tech tree DDs and even some BBs. In addition, many have some glaring vulnerability (e.g. HMS Drake's rear turret firing angles). Instead of a steady stream of more premium cruisers at T8, or more premium T9 CBs, why not cash in on the considerable pent up demand for balanced premium T9 CAs or CLs? Here are a few ideas based on ships that actually were built: USS Rochester - This ship belonged to the successor to the Baltimore class heavy cruiser, the Oregon City class. It was in service from 1946 to 1961. Here is how to bring the ship to the game: Start with a fully upgraded Baltimore Add a few thousand hit points Add a repair party and upgrade slot 6 (like all T9 cruisers get) Adjust the radar consumable to last 35 s (consistent with other T9 US cruisers) Increase turret rotation speed by 1 degree per second Decrease rudder shift by 0.5 - 1.0 s Slightly improve AA continuous damage to reflect historical AA battery and the better firing angles offered by the smaller super structure of this class Everything else stays virtually identical to the USS Baltimore The cool thing about Rochester is we know WG can balance what would essentially be a T9 Baltimore since that is where the ship was slated prior to the US cruiser CA/CL split. USS Fargo - This ship belonged to the successor to the Cleveland class light cruiser, and was the lead ship of the Fargo class. It was in service from 1945 to 1950. Here is how to bring the ship to the game: Start with a fully upgraded Cleveland Add a few thousand hit points Add a repair party and upgrade slot 6 (like all T9 cruisers get) Adjust the radar consumable to last 35 s (consistent with other T9 US cruisers) Decrease rudder shift by around 0.5 s Improve her concealment by -200 to -300 m Slightly improve AA continuous damage to reflect historical AA battery and the better firing angles offered by the smaller super structure of this class. Her AA should not be quite as strong as USS Seattle's because she did not have a dual purpose main battery. Everything else stays virtually identical to the USS Cleveland I'll do some further research on other historical T9 premium non-super cruisers that could be added to the game. One that comes to mind is the already in development: HMS Tiger. Maybe add HE shells, or a short range hydro and some more hit-points and up-tier her to T9? If anyone has any other cruisers that could fit in this category, historical or not, please share below. Thanks!
  3. meat2

    Cruiser role.

    There are many topics on the forum that cover cruisers, ATF, battleships hiding, cruiser roles, torpedoes spam, cruisers hiding,aircraft carriers, and teamwork. But the topic of the role of cruisers is one major idea that kind of covers and unites them together. If a forum reader reads through the threads on any of the topics listed above he/she will notice something; in many of these topics a player speaking from the point of view of battleship players will tell the cruiser players that cruisers are a "support" class. So, this question is primary for battleship players, what do you mean by "support"? How do you actually define "support role"? Also take in consideration the play-ability of your definition, enjoyment that cruiser player would have playing by your ideas, and also the take into consideration current game mechanics. P.S. If you are a player that primary plays other classes, or want to speak from the point of view of destroyers, cruisers, or aircraft carriers feel free to speak your own mind on the role of cruisers and the meaning of the idea of "support." Be civil everyone and thank you.
  4. Hi all, I wish you all a happy new year! Are you a fan of HE spam? Are you afraid of them? Do you know how to encounter them? If you don't, then join them! Tier 9 Premium US Cruiser USS Fargo CL-106 Ship Length - 610 feet Beam - 66 feet Draft - 25 feet speed - 32.5 knots Hit points - between 39,000 - 49,000 Main Battery Four 150mm triple-barrelled guns Rate of Fire - 10 rounds per minute Reload Time - 6 seconds Firing Range - 18.29km Maximum HE shell Damage - 3,400 Maximum AP shell Damage - 8,200 Secondary Armament Six 130mm double-barrelled guns Firing Range - 5km Rate of Fire - 15 rounds per minute Reload Time - 4 seconds Maximum HE Shell Damage - 2,100 AA Defence Four 150mm triple-barrelled guns Average Damage per second - between 90 - 95 Firing Range - 6km Four quad 40mm Bofors Average damage per second - 270 Firing Range - 3.51km Six double 40mm Bofors Average Damage per Second - 135 Firing Range - 3.51km ten 20mm Oerlikon Average Damage per Second - 83 Firing Range - 2.01km Maneuverability Rudder Shift Time - between 7 to 9 seconds Speed - 32.5 knots Concealment Detectability by Sea - between 9 to 11km Detectability by Air - between 7 - 8km Aircraft Complement 4 Floatplanes Possible Consumables Damage Control Party Enhanced AA Fire Hydroacoustic Search/ Fighter Surveillance Radar/ Spotting Aircraft Repair Party
  5. So to start this post off, I've been thinking about a Commonwealth line for a long while. It really interests me coming from both a national perspective (being a Canuk myself and all) and a historical one. Going from small collection of aging ships, to a powerful naval force to be reckoned with, the explosive growth of the Commonwealth navies during and after ww2 was truly astounding. Coupled with all the history many ships in their respective navies had, and the already fun gameplay from the current premiums in the line (Haida is one of my favorite DDs in the game), I feel that a Commonwealth line could definitely have it's place in the game. One of the biggest issues I see people cite when talking about a hypothetical line, is the worry that they'll just become clones of already existing British ships. This is probably one of the biggest arguments I see, and is absolutely a fair one. Ships of the Commonwealth of nations usually were modified or part of a class of British built ships, with some being on lend lease themselves from other nations. However, with that being said, we do have a complete tech tree of British ships, and historically speaking, there was a lot more variety of ship classes that served with Commonwealth nations that aren't in game yet, so I feel that there is enough variety to warrant the nation itself. Also a great Segway into the videos I wanted to share from @SappeREffecT Like I said, I was thinking about writing up about my ideal vision for a commonwealth line a while back, and started looking into other people's ideas of what the line should look like for reference. I then came across Sapper's vids after a search through YouTube, and I really liked the concept he had for a tech tree. I won't summarize the videos here because I highly recommend that you go and watch them, as he goes into quite a bit of depth in each one, but the general idea that Sapper had was to make each line as unique from the British in terms of ship classes and gameplay, as possible. Now I don't want people to think that I'm just advertising the video for him here, because my intention throughout this post is to try and encourage discussion about a Commonwealth tech tree, but Sapper as well as I, really wanted to create a thoughtful discussion around this topic, and I felt that his videos were really well done in terms of creating a unique and balanced line. So after talking with him as well, I got permission from him to share his videos in the North American forums to do just that. Again, these are not my videos, and Sapper has gratefully allowed me to share them on the forums. I felt like this was probably the best Commonwealth line proposal I've seen so far on then internet (as it solves quite well the issues that some have with the idea of a Commonwealth line), and the fact that Sapper really was hoping for feedback on his proposal gave me some motivation to create this post, as well as being stuck in a house all day. I just want to have the lines play well and have a historical basis if and when they eventually come out, so why not start by suggesting to WG what the ideal tech trees should look like. Below is a quick summary of the ships proposed for each line in the video. Destroyers: Tier II: Champlain (RAN/RCN) Firepower: 3x1 102mm Torpedoes: 2x2 533mm Speed: 31 kts Consumables: Damage control, Creeping smoke Tier III: Waterhen (RAN) Firepower: 4x1 102mm Torpedoes: 2x3 533mm Speed: 34 kts Consumables: Damage control, Creeping smoke Tier IV: Stuart (RAN) Firepower: 5x1 120mm Torpedoes: 2x3 533mm Speed: 34 kts Consumables: Damage control, Creeping smoke Tier V: Skeena (RCN) Firepower: 4x1 120mm Torpedoes: 2x4 533mm Speed: 36 kts Consumables: Damage control, Creeping smoke, Hydroacoustic search Tier VI: Chaudiere (RCN) Firepower: 4x1 120mm Torpedoes: 2x4 533mm Speed: 36 kts Consumables: Damage control, Creeping smoke, Hydroacoustic search Tier VII: Jan Van Riebeeck (SAN) Firepower: 4x1 120mm Torpedoes: 2x4 533mm Speed: 36 kts Consumables: Damage control, Creeping smoke, Hydroacoustic search, Defensive AA/Speed boost Tier VIII: Napier (RAN) Firepower: 3x2 120mm Torpedoes: 2x5 533mm Speed: 36 kts Consumables: Damage control, Creeping smoke/Surveillance radar, Hydroacoustic search, Defensive AA/Speed boost Tier IX: Battle (RAN) Firepower: 2x2 113mm Torpedoes: 2x5 533mm Speed: 36 kts Consumables: Damage control, Creeping smoke/Surveillance radar, Hydroacoustic search, Defensive AA/Speed boost Tier X: Vendetta (RAN) Firepower: 3x2 113mm Torpedoes: 2x5 533mm Speed: 36 kts Consumables: Damage control, Creeping smoke/Surveillance Radar, Hydroacoustic search, Defensive AA/Speed boost Cruisers: Tier I: Indus (RIN/RAN/RNZN) Firepower: 2x1 120mm Range: 9.5km Speed: 19 kts Consumables: Damage control Tier II: Pelorus (RAN) Firepower: 8x1 102mm Range: 11 km Speed: 22 kts Consumables: Damage control Tier III: Challenger (RAN) Firepower: 11x1 152mm Range: 12 km Speed: 24 kts Consumables: Damage control Tier IV: Chatham (RAN/RNZN) Firepower: 8x1 152mm Torpedoes: 2x1 533mm Range: 13 km Speed: 26 kts Consumables: Damage control, Hydroacoustic search Tier V: Dunedin (RNZN) Firepower: 6x1 152mm Torpedoes: 4x3 533mm Range: 14 km Speed: 29 kts Consumables: Damage control, Creeping smoke, Hydroacoustic search Tier VI: Hobart (RAN/RNZN/RIN) Firepower: 4x2 152mm Torpedoes: 2x4 533mm Range: 15 km Speed: 33 kts Consumables: Damage control, Creeping smoke, Hydroacoustic search Tier VII: Bellona (RNZN/PN) Firepower: 4x2 152mm Torpedoes: 2x3 533mm Range: 16km Speed: 33 kts Consumables: Damage control, Creeping smoke, Hydroacoustic search Tier VIII: Swiftsure (RCN) Firepower: 3x3 152mm Torpedoes: 2x3 533mm Range: 16.5 km Speed: 33 kts Consumables: Damage control, Creeping smoke/Surveillance radar, Hydroacoustic search Tier IX: Tiger (RAN/RCN/RNZN hypothetical ownership) Firepower: 3x3 152mm Torpedoes: 2x3 533mm Range: 16.5 km Speed: 34 kts Consumables: Damage control, Creeping smoke/Surveillance radar, Hydroacoustic search, Repair party Tier X: Bellerophon/11 24a design (Hypothetical ownership) Firepower: 4x3 152mm Torpedoes: 2x4 533mm Range: 17km Speed: 34 kts Consumables: Damage control, Creeping smoke/Surveillance radar, Hydroacoustic search, Repair party That's pretty much a technical summary of all the silver ships that Sapper had proposed in his video. I personally don't agree with all of the ships selected or left out of the line, but again, it solves a lot of the issues people might have with Commonwealth ships. One element Sapper only lightly touched on in his video though, was the idea of aircraft carriers. Honestly, I wasn't too excited since CVs really aren't that balanced right now, and we saw how well adding in a new line worked out with the German CVs. looking at it more and more though, I began to develop a vision myself of what the gameplay of the ships. So now I wanted to try and give my two cents on a Commonwealth CV line. Now I am well aware of how controversial carriers are, and like Sapper said in his video, it probably shouldn't be added anytime soon. However, contrary to popular belief, Commonwealth navies did operate aircraft carriers, though most were in operation mid-late war and during the cold war. To me, they represent the rapid development of Commonwealth navies during the second world war, and have quite a few unique aircraft that could be proposed for some of the carriers on this list. For a ship or an aircraft to have to make it onto my list, it had to be majority crewed by a Commonwealth nation, and/or the aircraft that were both in service with their respective nation and had to feasibly have been able to be carried by said ship (there may be an exception or two with the proposed tier 4). If there are better suggestions for either a ship or aircraft that I didn't include in this proposal, definitely let me know. For the CV gameplay itself, I wanted to settle on a "Boom and zoom" playstyle where it was a high risk, but high reward style of gameplay. I really had fun playing the pre bait-and-switch Graf zeppelin, and I wanted to try and recreate the gameplay of that ship within this line. The main idea is to have the aircraft be some of the fastest at their tier, dropping a low number of high alpha munitions. The biggest downsides of the carriers would be their nonexistent healthpool, tiny squads, small carrier plane reserves, and the CV's complete lack of self defense armament. The rockets have unusually low damage and fire chance compared to the bombs and torpedoes, the torpedoes are quite slow, and the bombers have a wide drop circle and long attack prep times, but they drop like Kaga's bombers do, with a high pitch up, and then a long, flat dive towards the target. On top of that, starting from tier 8, they'll have access to the new Air Dropped Smoke consumable, which will help the ships greatly in assisting their team while adding a new element to CV gameplay. This makes the line overall very good at striking large and lonely capital ships, but heavily punishes the CV player for misplays such as flying into a large group of ships, or remaining in a ships continuous AA bubble. Aircraft Carriers: Tier IV: Proposed C2 Transport conversion (Halifax or Alice Springs good names?) A proposed conversion of the type C2 class of United states cargo transports into escort carriers, these ships had the potential to serve in either the RCN or RAN. Like many of her contemporaries, she lacks speed, secondary armament, and hangar size. Speed: 16 kts Aircraft carried: 20, 4 reserve Attack aircraft: 4 per squad, 2 per attack: Bristol Bulldog (RAN), Armstrong Witworth Siskin (RCN) Torpedo aircraft: 6 per squad, 2 per attack: Westland Wapiti (RAN, RCN), Hawker Demon (RAN) Dive bomber aircraft: 6 per squad, 2 per attack: Westland Wapiti (RAN, RCN), Hawker Demon (RAN) Quick Summary: Out of all the carriers proposed on this list, this ship is probably the biggest stretch in the entire proposed tech tree. For the ship itself, I based it off the proposed American conversion of the C2 cargo ships. Many of the older carrier conversions were based on tankers or cargo ships, and quite a few were sold over to the British under the lend lease program (later named the ruler class by the British). These lend lease ships were sometimes transferred to British commonwealth nations (as with the next t6 choice). Aircraft Relevance: For the aircraft, I decided to add inter-war aircraft that were as relevant as I could find. I split her aircraft into either RAAF or RCAF proposals, depending on which nation this ship would have been leased to from Britain (either Australia or Canada). For fighters, I chose the Bristol Bulldog for the RAAF, and the Armstrong Siskin for the RCAF. In terms of dive bombers and torpedo bombers, I chose the Westland Wapiti which was operated by both the RCAF and RAF, and the Hawker Demon which was a prominent Aussie light bomber in the interwar period. I felt like each was the best option to fit said interwar time period. Relevance of the ship: Now I understand that this ship is a big stretch to add in, but it's one of the only few paper ship proposals and the only paper ship in this proposed line. Honestly, if anyone else has a better idea for a tier 4 commonwealth carrier, I'll gladly take it. This is just theory crafting at the end of the day. Tier VI: Nabob (RCN) The first ever aircraft carrier to be majority crewed by the Royal Canadian Navy, Nabob was a modified Bogue-class escort carrier supplied to the Royal navy under the lend-lease program. Apart rom the aircrew, the ship was entirely operated by the Royal Canadian Navy for the specific purpose of Anti Submarine Warfare. During Operation Goodwind, Nabob was torpedoed by the submarine U-354, but remained afloat and was able to limp back to Scapa Flow. Damaged beyond repair, she was run aground in the River Clyde and later scrapped. Speed: 18 kts Aircraft carried: 28, 10 reserve Attack aircraft: 6 per squad, 2 per attack: Vought F4-U Corsair, Curtiss Kittyhawk, Bristol Beaufighter Torpedo aircraft: 6 per squad, 3 per attack: Avro Anson, Bristol Beaufighter Dive Bomber aircraft: 6 per squad, 2 per attack: Avro Anson, Bristol Beaufighter Quick summary: This is where things get interesting for commonwealth carriers and their flavor starts to stand out. While Nabob is still slow with weak amour and secondaries, it's her aircraft that really make her shine. Unlike her predecessor's aircraft, the aircraft on Nabob are much faster than the rest at her tier, but lack health and effective munitions to deal with destroyers. While her rocket planes are fast, the weapons they carry are incredibly lackluster with bad alpha damage, penetration, and a larger ellipse than her competitors. This will start to become a common trend throughout the rest of the tree. Things shift for the better for her Bombers and Torpedo Bombers. While both have relatively low health when compared to their counterparts, the dive bombers have improved speed, alpha damage (though low fire chance), and accuracy. The torpedo bombers don't have the same speed yet, but the torpedoes they carry have relatively good punch and speed, compensating for the low number that they drop. Aircraft Relevance: Ok, so the selection of aircraft to choose at this tier was pretty broad, unlike tier 4. For attack aircraft, I chose both historically equipped ones such as the corsairs historically carried, and aircraft operated by the RCAF such as the Beaufighter and the Kittyhawk. Torpedo and dive bombers are where it gets interesting in terms of aircraft. The Avro Anson was technically not a carrier borne aircraft, but I feel that unless its a completely irrational aircraft, such as something like a B-17 or a Lancaster, it should be fine. The Anson was used in both maritime patrol and as a light bomber, so I feel it could work fine in game from a historical and functional point of view. The Bristol Beaufighter was also a good pick, since it was historically a generalist and could carry both bombs and torpedoes. The Beaufighter was also historically relevant, being used throughout the war and with many commonwealth nations, especially Canada and Australia. Relevance of the ship: Nabob, and her sister ship Puncher, were the first ever carriers to be operated by and commonwealth nation. They are a stark example of the rapid militarization of the commonwealth nations during world war 2. While it may be a stretch to place a modified Bogue class at tier 6, the historical significance of the ship and the aircraft proposed make up for it in my mind. Tier VIII: Vengeance (RAN) One of the 1942 light fleet carriers, later known as the Colossus-Class light fleet carriers, Vengeance was designed to be a fast escort carrier, sacrificing a larger aircraft complement in exchange for speed. Vengeance was assigned to task force 111, but was too late to see service in world war 2. She was, however, used as the venue for the Japanese surrender at Hong Kong. The ship was transferred to the RAN in June of 1951 and was commissioned into the RAN as a stopgap for HMAS Melbourne, which was running late. In game, she reflects a shift in commonwealth carriers from slow converted tankers with a large detection radius, to faster, stealthy, and relatively smaller escort carriers. However, she lacks any secondary armament whatsoever, and her AA suite isn't that impressive when compared to other carriers at her tier. Speed: 27 knots Aircraft carried: 34, 13 reserve Attack aircraft: 6 per squad, 2 per attack: Hawker tempest, Bristol Beaufighter, CAC Kangaroo (air dropped smoke, action time: 5 sec, duration: 40 sec, cannot conceal CV's) Torpedo aircraft: 9 per squad, 3 per attack: Vultee A35 Vengance, De Hallivand Mosquito, Bristol Beaufighter, CAC Woomera Dive Bomber aircraft: 6 per squad, 2 per attack: Vultee A35 Vengance, De Hallivand Mosquito, Bristol Beaufighter, CAC Woomera Quick (not really) Summary: Vengeance improves on where Nabob left off, both in terms of aircraft and the hull they launch from. Compared to many of her tier mates, she has improved speed, greatly improved detection (better than some battleships), and improved armor overall, though no armored flight deck like her British counterparts, so don't expect to survive constant shellfire like her contemporaries. She does have some big negatives however, as one large one is her complete lack of secondary armament. Historically, the Colossus-Class had no secondary armament whatsoever, and the ship should reflect that. And while the carrier will have access to the carrier borne fighter consumable, her AA suite is also unimpressive, with lackluster range (due to no large caliber AA such as DP guns) and lower DPS in the outer rings Finally, and one of the biggest drawbacks of the line, she has quite a low number of planes in reserve with a measly 13. This means that losing your already fragile planes can be much more punishing than losing planes in an American or Japanese carriers. This starts to give the high tier commonwealth carriers a unique playstyle of "playing with fire" where they can push closer to the front line to increase their aircraft turnaround time and attack efficiency when positioned right, but heavily punishes mispositioning and encounters with other enemies. Moving over to her aircraft, the biggest change from previous ships is that Vengeance's aircraft have access to air dropped smoke, and this is quite a gamechanger for a carrier. instead of a selfish playstyle mostly relegated to hounding larger lonely targets, this smoke adds a huge new teamplay element. If your cruiser is caught out, if your destroyer is yolo'ing, if your battleship is being focus fired or is overextended, a well timed smoke drop could be a lifesaver. It adds a huge new element in teamplay that carriers are so lacking in right now. The only thing that separates these smoke screens from any other smoke in the game is that they cannot conceal an aircraft carrier. This is to prevent stupid situations of the aircraft carrier being able to constantly hide themselves from the enemy team and play selfishly. With that out of the way and moving on to the planes themselves, the divide between speed and health becomes even more apparent than in the previous tier. Her torpedo bombers now sport the 3x3 squads common with tier 8 carriers but otherwise, her loadout is quite similar to Nabob. For the attack aircraft, the word "attack" really shouldn't apply, as their rockets are hands down the worst at their tier, with low penetration, bad alpha, and terrible fire chance. The only saving grace of her attack aircraft is their speed and air dropped smoke consumable. These should not be used to deal damage, but rather for dropping smoke screens for the team or scouting cruisers and battleships. Fortunately, her bombers and torpedo bombers manage to more than make up for her attack aircraft. Her torpedo bombers and dive bombers continue the trend of fast planes with high alpha damage, but weak health pools and small squadrons. Air dropped bombs deal high amounts of damage with a an ok chance of setting fires, but have a wide ellipse and low amount of bombs dropped to compensate. Her torpedoes are improved when compared to Nabob however, as while they are some of the slowest at their tier, their alpha damage is no joke. Aircraft Relevance: There were definitely a whole lot of options here. From aircraft that were homegrown ideas and those that were produced in Australia, to those that served in large numbers in the RAAF and those that were the most relevant to becoming carrier-borne aircraft. Since her historical aircraft were cold war jets and helicopters, most of the suggestions I put up were down to some theory crafting and Wargaming logic of changing history, but that's ok since this isn't a historically accurate game. Not being sarcastic at all. For Attack aircraft, the Tempest and Beaufighter were both mid to late war aircraft that were in service with the RAAF. Both are relatively well known and feasible in regards to armament and max speed. The CAC Kangaroo is a little bit different from the other two, since it didn't actually see service with the RAAF, but was a wholly designed and built Australian aircraft intended to serve in the air force, but the project was cancelled due to the rise of jet fighters. Torpedo Bombers and Bombers had a lot more options to choose from. Again the Beaufighter is always a good choice, but as another alternative option, the De Hallivand Mosquito was an incredibly effective carrier-borne fighter bomber and relatively famous as well. Two other options that were built and operated in Australia were the A35 Vengeance and the CAC Woomera. For the A35, the variant was a licensed built Australian version of the American Vultee A31 Vengeance and saw service in the RAN, though were reportedly ineffective in their roles. The CAC Woomera was developed in parallel to the CAC Kangaroo. Designed and prototyped in Australia, the fighter bomber was cancelled due to the rise of jet aircraft in the early 50s. Relevance of the ship: While Vengeance wasn't the first purpose built aircraft carrier to be operated by the Aussies, with that honor going to HMAS Sydney, She had some relevant history behind her during the end of ww2 and was the ship where Japan's surrender at Hong Kong was signed. After the lessons of WW2, Australia proposed a naval strategy involving a large task force consisting of multiple aircraft carriers. Melbourne was supposed to be one of said aircraft carriers placed into service, but work on her was delayed until 1955 and thus, Vengeance was rushed in as a stopgap in her place. While she only served for a few years, I chose her over her replacement and predecessor, HMAS Melbourne and HMAS Sydney respectively, mainly due to the natural progression she represents in the line, with the Colossus class aircraft carriers being the original designs behind the 1942 light fleet carriers. I felt like having a Majestic class carrier along with another at tier 10 would just be redundant. If there is a better choice for tier VIII that you think might be better, please let me know. Tier X: Project Habbaku... er... Bonaventure (RCN) The last aircraft carrier in service with the Royal Canadian navy, Bonaventure belonged to the powerful Majestic-Class of escort carriers, which were themselves a modified Colossus-Class (modifications included a mirror landing aid, angled flight deck, and a steam catapult). Initially laid down as HMS Powerful, Bonaventure was purchased and renamed by the Royal Canadian Navy in 1952 as a replacement for the current HMCS Magnificent. Remaining in service for 18 years until 1970, she led her own ASW Hunter-Killer group in the North Atlantic off of Canada's coast and participated in numerous NATO exercises during the early and later years of the cold war. In game, Bonaventure represents the pinnacle of the commonwealth aircraft carrier line, and lives and dies by it's style of play. While she carries over Vengeance's lack of secondary armament and AA firepower, her concealment and speed are greatly improved so as to make her one of the stealthiest and fastest carriers at T10. In regards to aircraft, their stats are quite extreme as well, being some of the fastest aircraft in the game with some of the hardest hitting ammunition, but with the lowest hitpoints and largest turning circle in the game. Speed: 30 knots Aircraft carried: 40, 16 reserve Attack aircraft: 6 per squad, 2 per attack: Hawker Sea Fury, De Hallivand Vampire (air dropped smoke, action time: 5 sec, duration: 60 sec, cannot conceal CV's) Torpedo aircraft: 9 per squad, 3 per attack: Bristol Beaufort, Fairchild Bolingbroke, Hawker Sea Fury (air dropped smoke, action time: 5 sec, duration: 50 sec, cannot conceal CV's) Dive Bomber aircraft: 9 per squad, 3 per attack: Bristol Beaufort, Fairchild Bolingbroke, Hawker Sea Fury (air dropped smoke, action time: 5 sec, duration: 50 sec, cannot conceal CV's) Quick Summary: Alright so we've finally got to the cream of the crop at tier 10 with Bonaventure. The aircraft she carries are extreme stats wise, with the fastest aircraft at tier 10 and some of the largest alpha damage on her bombs and torpedoes. The major downsides of these aircraft are their abysmal heathpools, small number of squadrons, lack of aircraft reserves and refresh times, and terrible turning radius. Because of these traits, her aircraft tactics are best described as "boom and zoom", blasting through AA in order to strike single ships efficiently. This doesn't mean that her aircraft can take on large groups of ships though, as their horrible hitpoints, tiny squads, and huge turning circles means that while attacking lone ships is quite effective, attacking overlapping AA bubbles is incredibly punishing as while you blast through one bubble, it's kind of "out of the frying pan and into the fire" when you drop one ship and slingshot into another's AA. Moving on to the aircraft first, her attack aircraft refine the playstyle of their predecessors, while amplifying their weaknesses. Being the fastest attack aircraft in the game, these aircraft are great for early game spotting on large enemy ships, but that's unfortunately where the good news stops. Despite being two tiers higher than Vengeance, the rockets Bonnie's fighters carry are arguably worse tier for tier with that same horrid alpha, same garbage pen, and the same low fire chance. Each aircraft does carry a larger amount than found on Vengeance, but these planes should not be dealing damage. Instead, their best use is their formerly mentioned scouting, and their improved air dropped smoke consumable, making the aircraft the best support squads in the game. Fortunately for her rocket planes, Bonnie's torpedo and dive bombers really come into their own here. Like the fighters, her bombers and torp bombers are the fastest at their. But while her the fighters weaponry is lackluster, the other two squads are far from that. Starting with the bombers, the munitions they drop are nothing to scoff at, with some of the best HE alpha at tier. The downsides of these weapons however, is their mediocre fire chance, low number of dropped bombs, and large drop ellipse so missed munitions are going to hurt more than on any other carrier. The torpedoes her TB's drop also have some of the best alpha at tier and you drop quite a few, but are much harder to aim properly due to their terrible speeds. Both squads do have access to the air dropped smoke however, which gives the ship even more teamplay potential than Vengeance. Finally for the ship itself, Bonnie can best be described as "don't be seen" where, while she has the best concealment out of all tier 10 carriers by a fair margin, when she does get spotted things don't go very well. Her complete lack of secondary armament and lackluster AA suite tied together with a mediocre HP pool means that she will die and she will die quickly. While you can definitely play closer to the action in Bonnie, always have an exit strategy, because if you're team falls apart on one flank, you only have a modest speed and good detect to fall back on. Aircraft Relevance: Disregarding any of the specialized aircraft and looking at the best aircraft to put in each squadron overall, I had to choose the hawker sea fury. This aircraft fits the role perfectly in regards to relevancy, historical significance, and playstyle wise. The sea fury was one of the last prop aircraft to serve with the Royal Canadian Navy, and was one of, if not the fastest single engine piston aircraft to ever be built. The RCN ordered a large batch of around 74 aircraft, which served on Bonnies historical predecessor Magnificent, and briefly on Bonnie herself if I'm correct. Personally, I had hoped to see the sea fury on Audacious at tier 10 instead of the wyverns we got, but even if this entire line is too outlandish, I still hope that either Magnificent or Bonnie could pop up as a premium some time purely because of the sea furies they operated. Now onto the other picks I had on my list, first off, and this pick might be controversial, but I chose the early jet aircraft the De Hallivand Vampire. Aeronautical enthusiasts might know this aircraft, but it's not as well known as something like the Me 262. The Vampire was one of the first jet aircraft to serve in the Royal Navy and the first jet aircraft to serve in the RCAF. Now we don't have any jet aircraft currently in the game, but as long as its stats aren't completely ludicrous, it shouldn't really make a difference than the regular piston aircraft found at tier 10. Onto torpedo and dive bombers. While I still believe the sea fury could work better in these roles, the two other aircraft I chose were the Bristol Beaufort and the Fairchild Bolingbroke. Both had relevant histories, with the Beaufort being a purpose built dive and torp bomber that served in limited numbers with the RCAF, but I feel like the better pick here would be the Fairchild Bolingbroke. The Bolingbroke's served as Canadian made maritime patrol and bombers, serving almost exclusively with the RCAF. Placing this plane on a carrier feels like a bit of a stretch since it was mainly a maritime patrol aircraft, but with a little bit of WG logic, it could probably work fine in game as a bomber. The main reason I chose this aircraft for its role was the history behind it, being a wholly made Canadian bomber that was crucial to maritime patrol of the Atlantic and pacific during ww2. Again though, I do feel like the sea fury would be a better pick overall. Relevance of the ship: For me, I decided the tier 10 had to be a majestic class and it was thus a choice between the Bonaventure and the Magnificent. I chose Bonnie over Maggie for a few reasons. The first and biggest reason, was that Bonaventure was a heavily modified Majestic class carrier, which themselves were a modified subclass of the Colossus class. I felt that it was important to make the tier 10 hull as different from the tier 8 as possible, while trying to stay with Sapper's vid which I based this line on. Another reason was that she was an obvious linear progression from the Vengeance, again being a modified Majestic class ship and thus having quite similar attributes to the tier 8. Finally, I picked her because of her historical relevance and service life. Being in service for 18 years and also the last aircraft carrier to be operated by Canada, she really represents the end of the explosive growth of the commonwealth navies during the second world war and later, the cold war. Going from small, scrappy handfuls of aging ships, to a large set of independent navies that are a force to be reckoned with, having a capital ship such as a carrier is more a testament to how large each countries respective navies got, and Bonnie really represents that the best. Concluding this rambling: And that pretty much concludes my ramblings on the forums. This took a long time to create and is probably the longest post I've ever made on the forums, so I hope I didn't make too many grammatical mistakes. Probably one of the biggest reason I wrote this entire essay, was because I hope that it'll bring interest to a Commonwealth tech tree. Again, I feel like they're long overdue, and now that we're getting Italian BB's, who knows. I really hope that WG might see some of the other proposals that have been posted throughout the years, and listen to the players ideas if and when they create a Commonwealth line. If there is any critique or feedback for anything discussed in this post, please let me or Sapper know. The best way to make a proposed Commonwealth tech tree good is through player feedback, which I worry WG hasn't entirely listened to these past few years. Stay safe out there during this terrible pandemic. We'll get through it!
  6. Title about sums it up. Recently, I finally completed the Captain Bad Advice collection and as such, I now have a 10 point RN captain sitting in my port, waiting for a ship. However, that's the rub: I don't have a ship to put her on and I don't know what to choose. Currently, I have four RN ships in my fleet: HMS Exeter, HMS Warspite, HMS Implacable, and HMS Indomitable, all of which I already have 10+ point captains for. As for the new ship, since I'm torn on what to pick, so I've decided, in a mild twist of irony, to turn the mic over to the rest of you in hopes of getting some good advice. What do you guys think? Should I pick up one of the RN cruiser lines? Should I complete the Fleet Air Arm trifecta and buy the Ark Royal? Perhaps I should start my way down the RN DD line, or restart the RN BB line, or choose between London, Vanguard, Hood, and HMS Dreadnought for another premium? Feel free to let me know if you so choose. Thank you in advance to anyone who offers any advice. Sincerely, 1Sherman. *Update: Bought myself a Fiji based on your advice. If 108k damage, two kills, and the near single-handed fighting off of a Chapayev, an Atago, a Siegfried, and an FDG one after the other is any indication, I might just have to listen to you guys more often.
  7. Draperk148

    Light Cruiser Captain Build

    What would be the optimum 19 point light cruiser captain build sailing US and CCCP light cruisers for PVP matches? Is PM and or LS important? The Captain is Alex O so he can sail both lines. Currently he is PT, EM, AR, DE, CE, and IFHE. Thanks in advance for your help and opinions.
  8. Give them a separate consumable slot for DFAA. is is a much more comprehensive way to address the power creep they have experienced than buffing their reload, and makes them actually viable as AA cruisers again.
  9. HeavenlyWind_

    Spanish Cruiser Line?

    I think it can be done. Though, WG would need to think of an exclusive gimmick. Thoughts?
  10. I would like to commend Yuzorah for posted the article of the new Soviet VMF light & heavy cruisers recently: https://thedailybounce.net/world-of-warships/world-of-warships-the-russian-cruisers-line-split/ I thank him for sparing me the trouble from making a long article, which I'll save it for my other articles in the future. Still, I would like to help making an introspective to complete the circle. Tier V - Kotovsky appears to be, from my knowledge, is possibly an overhauled light cruiser Admiral Butakov of the Svetlana-class (which was incomplete prior to the Russian Civil War). Largely based on Project 78 training cruiser modernization & refit plan, in addition to the Project MK-4 prior to Project 94 Budyonny development & postwar Project MLK-series design studies, particularly the 4 x 2 -152mm MK-4 twin guns. Данные Проект МК-3 МК-4 МК-5 МК-6 Проект 94 по ОТЗ июня 1940 Проект 94 по ОТЗ декабря 1940 Дата — 2 апреля 1940 — 20 марта 1941 Июнь 1940 Декабрь 1940 Водоизмещение 7760 8000 8130 7800 7500 8200 Главный калибр 3х2 152 мм 3х2 152 мм 3х2 152 мм 5х2 130 мм 3х2 152 мм 3х3 152 мм So instead of the 130mm B-2LM turrets, the 152mm MK-4 turrets are selected in place of them. Alexander Nevsky is indeed the Project 84 air defence cruiser. The namesake is befitting for Tier X, given Alexander Nevsky was made a saint in Russian history & is considered as one of the most respectable men among the Russian people with high esteem. Besides, I like how WG devs opted for two SM-48 twin DP gun turrets on the aft of Borodino in place of the nonexistent single quad DP gun turret as shown in the draft blueprint (sensible choice). Just in case if anyone has yet to know what is Borodino & which project she came from, Borodino is, in actuality, the Project TsNII-45 small battleship - Variant III+III-3 Tallinn is indeed an ex-German Hipper-class heavy cruiser Lutzow, and she was formerly Petropavlovsk before renamed to Tallinn after raised from sinking. This Tallinn was, in actuality, to be officially retrofitted under Project 83-K. But it seems like Tallinn is given Kirov's MK-3-180 main gun turrets instead of the supposedly Chapayev's 152mm MK-5 triple gun turrets as originally planned for Pr. 83-K. 4 x 3 – 152mm/57 MK-5 triple gun turrets 6 x 2 – 100mm/70 SM-5-1 twin DP gun turrets 3 x 4 – 45mm/78 SM-20-ZIF quad heavy AA gun mounts 6 x 4 – 25mm/79 4M-120 quad light AA gun mounts I'm not entirely clear about both Riga & Petropavlovsk. But the one thing is certain to me, is that both Riga & Petropavlovsk are supposedly representing a direct parallel to Project 69 - Kronshtadt & Project 82 - Stalingrad. Whilst Petropavlovsk is possibly the Variant III of the Pr. 82 development before it officially laid down as Stalingrad with more modern 305mm main guns, Riga could likely be Project 22 heavy cruiser/battlecruiser that was later cancelled & carried forward to the development of Pr. 69 - Kronshtadt. Other source suggested that Pr. 22 was later picked up for studies to develop Pr. 66 - Moskva. (I sense a slight discrepancy in regards to the fate of Pr. 22) In addition, with Nevsky announced to be the top tier AACL, I got the feeling that Dimitri Donskoy could as well receive a 152mm BL-118 triple DP gun turrets upgrade to keep in the line with the general trend of Tier IX & X being an AACLs like USN's Seattle & Worcester, as well as RN's Neptune & Minotaur.
  11. Hello everyone. I occasionally write some ship proposals of ships i'd love to see in the game, and today i'm going to do over HSMS Tre Kronor, a late-war Swedish Light Cruiser. HP: 27,300 Armor: 20-25mm belt+70mm vitals (citadel) Turrets 125/30/80/50 F/S/B/R 130mm total deck (30mm outer) 127mm conning tower 16mm plating 13mm superstructure Source: Conway's fighting ships 1922-1948 27,300 is very low for T7 cruisers and isn’t great even against T6 cruisers either. The citadel does stick a fair bit above the waterline, according to this blueprint (7819x2906, had to photoshop 2 pages together), so you’ll have to use your rudder shift and to try and avoid incoming fire. The turrets themselves are quite well protected as well. Length 182m Beam 16.45m SHP 90,000 Speed 33kts Rudder Shift: 4.9s Turning Circle: est 670m With a maneuverable rudder, you should be able to bob and weave between enemy shells pretty well, considering you have a high effective range. Still, be wary of overmatch. WEAPONRY 1x3 152mm/53 Bofors model 1942 2x2 152mm/53 Bofors model 1942 10 rpm (70rpm from all guns) MV: 900mps TT: 20 deg/s IN GAME RANGE: 16.3 km (~10.5s shell travel) Firing Angles: 30 degrees front and rear, 360 degree traverse These guns are comfy. 360 degree traverse, and a very fast traverse speed, AND gun angles that allow you to stay in autobounce range should make a very comfortable experience. The 6s reload is also quite nice at this tier. AP 3200 AP Alpha Shell weight: 45.8kg AP Krupp: 2280 Drag: .348 224,000 (336,000) AP DPM Fuzes: Standard AP flight time and pen would be comparable to Duca Delgi Abruzzi (pen difference <15mm at nearly all distances, time to target within ~.7s to max range *note: couldn’t find an AP shell for this gun, so I played create-a-shell with supercontroller9 using the noted HE and AA muzzle velocities, and the similar characteristics to Italian cruisers, but Krupp and drag are values that are often used for balancing, rather than for historical performance. As you can see, the performance is very similar to the Italian 152mm guns currently in game. HE 2200 HE Alpha HE: 45.8kg *Similar weight to USN 152/47 HE shell* Fire Chance: 11% HE flight time would be better than USN at all ranges (11.3s to 16km compared to 14.1 for USN 152mm/47) 154,000 (231,000) HE DPM Krupp: 1100 Drag: .348 154,000 is on the low side for T7 cruisers- this is, after all, the tier with Boise and Helena. However, this is workable for one reason……. Well, I won’t spoil the surprise just yet. It’s coming though. This is the parabolic table for this gun (in Swedish). While these arcs aren't exactly what will be seen in game, they give a pretty good idea of the performance. 2x3 Torpedo Launchers Torped 14 12km range 62 knots 12,800 alpha Detect: 1.4km Flood Chance: 215% Reload: 69s Sweden really only used one torpedo throughout WWII, the Torped 14. The torpedo itself was quite nice, though it did have a small charge (248kg), which is similar to the Mahan’s Mk 15 mod 0 torpedo, which has a 224kg charge. Therefore, the torpedo would have just under 13k alpha, which is make up for by the competitive speed and quick reload. While I’m not certain of the exact angles the tubes would have, they should be quite good forward, but a bit lacking to the rear, due to the design having cranes on it. AA Weaponry 1x3 152mm/53 Bofors model 1942 30.9 dps @6km 2x2 152mm/53 Bofors model 1942 50.4 dps @6km 10x2 40mm/70 Bofors Model 1948 270 dps @4.2km 7x1 25 mm L/64 Bofors Model 1932 ~29.9 dps@2.0km I almost considered not doing this section considering it will be pointless before this ship will ever be in game, but i figured that I should add it in just so you could get an idea of how insane the AA is. The Bofors that litter most ships above tier 6 are the 40mm/60 caliber bofors, but the mounts on the Tre Kronor are the 40mm/70 cal model 1948. Well, so what? They’re a few years newer, sure, but that doesn’t explain the insane range and DPS boost compared to the standard. Well, the rate of fire of the 40mm/70 was double that of the standard 40mm/60 Bofors gun currently found in game (240 as opposed to 120rpm)-AND the range was also better than the predecessor. I estimated a bit for the 25mm gun, as the gun was said to be more effective than the 20mm oerlikon, so i estimated about 1.2x the dps of a single mount of that, but info about this specific gun is hard to find-not that it realistically matters, considering the insanity of the 40mms. Just be glad I’m not proposing the refitted version which saw those 25mm guns replaced with 7 more 40mm Bofors. Either way, you’re going to BULLY T6 Carriers, and you should be able to at least hurt the T8s. CONSUMABLES Slot 1: Damage Control (standard Slot 2: Hydro (standard Slot 3: Radar (25s, 8.49km) OR MBRB (-33% to reload speed, 45s duration, 180/120s cooldown, 1/2 charges) No DFAA. CVs are going to suffer enough trying to touch this thing. I’m not that evil. >T7 Premium CL >Late War I-think-we-all-know-where-this-is-going.jpg I know, I know, another T7 premium CL with Radar. But realistically, if Tre Kronor is going to survive at T7, she certainly needs the radar…..or does she? I’m also proposing that Tre Kronor have the option to fit a unique MBRB. Now, the 152mm gun that Tre Kronor has could fire 10 RPM at surface targets and 15 RPM in an AA function. What this unique MBRB does is allow Tre Kronor to have a 45 second period in which she has a 4 second reload against surface ships. In case you’re wondering why I had a second DPM number in parenthesis when discussing those numbers earlier, that’s why. Why does Tre Kronor need these powerful consumables? Well, you’ve probably noticed that I drew a lot of comparisons to Duca Delgi Abruzzi, another T7 cruiser. The issue with that is that the Duca is pretty underwhelming at T7, and is generally regarded as one of the worst T7 cruisers. However, Tre Kronor fixes major issues that the Duca has (mainly, range). The problem is that Tre Kronor is a perfect T6.5- it would need nerfs to fit into T6, and needs some help fitting into T7. I chose the latter option. The door is always open to giving it a heal. I didn’t want to make it more gimmicky than it already is, though. Thanks for reading. I look forward to and appreciate your feedback! ccccccc https://imgur.com/a/ZMN54AR https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/424389257818275843/534135447136239641/Tre_Kronor_Blueprint.jpg
  12. So I'm sure most, if not everyone, saw that Wargaming was looking to make some changes to IFHE, HE and plating. This has been an issue for a long time - BB's, HE, and IFHE. So this one is going to be part history lesson, part explainer, and part "how can we fix it". There's a lot of text, basically a wall, you have been warned. I: HE vs BB's back in the day - When the game first launched and sometime after - there was no IFHE, just HE. The point of HE was really for thin skinned targets like DD's, maybe some cruisers, and setting a BB on fire. Though at low tiers some HE could pen more than the BB superstructure. And while there was frustration at low tiers with fires being set, high tier had a very different problem - inconsistency of fires and how outmatched anything but a 203 mm cruiser was against a BB other than another BB, and even then 203's had some issues. Pen on a 5 inch gun HE round is 21.1 mm, 152 is 25.3. This meant bow on, high tier BB's and some cruisers were heavily immune to damage - AP would richochet or shatter, HE unless you caught the superstructure would shatter, and you had to hope on fires. Part of why fire damage was so high. This created an issue in that BB's and some heavy cruisers were likely a bit tougher than they should be to take down because fires were so horribly inconsistent for damage. So something had to be done to redress this right? II: IFHE and the rise of 152 mm cruisers - Damage was inconsistent, so the solution to Wargaming seemed simple - make it more consistent. Thus was IFHE born. And while it has seen tweaks to fire chance, early on it overly punished DD's that took it, and barely punished cruisers by comparison. DD's or any ship with 127 mm guns gained the ability to punch through 27 mm of armour - basically anything but the layer that covered tier 8+ BB's. 152-155mm guns however - they reached the magic number to pen 32 mm armour - what covers the bulk of BB's. Combined with the fire chances they maintained, especially with DE and flags - it was a perfect storm. DD's while potentially strong in low tiers now still lacked punch and had limits on what they penned, what had kept 203 mm cruisers in check, save the likes of Des, was Rof - but the light cruisers had the perfect combination of Alpha, Rate of Fire, and penetration to become monsters eating ships alive. Ships putting out 108 rounds a minute that were straight pass/fail, usually pass, vs most of a ships protection with 726 damage per hit. even if 3 of 12 is all that penetrated, that's 19,602 damage in 1 minute without setting a fire. Any better accuracy, or more Rate of Fire, and numbers really start to add up. Add in the arcs some have that allow them to fire from behind an island 100% safe, it now swung the other way. BB's, meant to be tanks and soak damage, were now ripped to shreds especially if more than one focused on them. Knowing the worst offenders had short range caused BB's to start playing further back, and helped start the "camp meta" of BB's terrified to go forward because even if a DD couldn't get them, they may have 2-3k or more stripped salvo after salvo that they couldn't return fire against and couldn't get away from fast enough. DD's, Cruisers, and now even CV's have had fire duration and damage lowered - BB's have not. Which leads us to - III: The Problem - The problem is really simple, math and timing. Now, most defenders would by now be saying "But Ghost, fires are 100% repairable". Yes well - what does that mean. What this actually means is that - if you have the means to repair all the fire damage you took - you can in fact repair it all. And that's part of the rub - there's a good chance you don't, and heres where the math comes in, as well as timing and other mechanics. With no modifiers at all - 1 fire on a BB does 18% hp damage, as well as large cruisers - a normal repair party (not UK style zombie heal) repairs 14% HP. Now - lets take another WG idea which is to just make premium consumables the default, and assume that it will keep the same CD and number of charges. On an NC as an example that's 4 charges, that last 28 seconds on an 80 second cooldown. 4 fires will do 72% hp damage if allowed to burn, or forced to, whereas the repair parties will only make up 56% of the hp - even with a 5th, you don't quite make it up. Now remember that the repair party takes time, and doesn't start to reset till after it's finished. So that's 28 seconds up, 80 down, 28, 80, 28, 80, 28. To use all 4 on that NC would take almost 6 minutes of taking 0 damage to get back all you can with no issues, a lot when your average match is likely 10-15 minutes. "Buuuut Ghost - there are things to change fire damage and all" - true. There are of course signal flags that reduce burn time and increase amount repaired, these two alone make it closer to 1 fire = 1 repair. But that still takes time and there is a key issue - you have to have those flags. 1 requires that you take 120% HP damage from 4 ships and survive, the other lose 40% HP to fires and survive the battle. Especially for a new player easier said then done. Only other way to get them is as rewards from directives, missions, etc or crates. Well, then you have modernization's - everyone can get them, right? DCSM 2 - the one that reduces fire time, is the 4th slot. Only tier 6 and higher ships have that option if they have a million credits to spend. So a tier 3-5 BB doesn't have that option, with tier 5 being a tier that can be shredded by 127 mm IFHE rounds, let alone 152 mm. Which then leaves skills which sure over time a player can build up to take a 3 point skill to reduce the fire time. If the player knows to get that and sacrifice in other areas that could be just as useful, well, by the time they hit tier 5 they will have only achieved in all likelihood 27-30k of the 37k xp they need to hit 6 points. So newbie in New York is likely going to have a bad day I start raining fire on him with my 14 point Cleveland captain put in my Atlanta. "Your forgetting DCP" - this, once again, comes down to timing. That firerate I pulled numbers for earlier is the current Cleveland. It has a base fire chance of 12%, knocked down to 9% by IFHE. And while I get it's part of the weird equation WG has for fire chance, lets assume that when that's factored in, the average for starting a fire is 6% or 6/100 hits starts a fire. Cleveland fires 108 shots in 60 seconds - Premium DCP coolsdown in 80 seconds. Even holding out till 2-3 fires are started odds are 3-4 get left to burn - up to 72% of the ships HP. And it'll take 6 minutes to repair that damage. And that's the potential of 1 ship let alone 2-3. a nightmare scenario of 100% accuracy yes, but cruisers can be quite accurate. But then comes the part everyone forgets about - the penetration damage. It's not just the fire damage, but the fact that if we round up that figure from above to 20000 - most repair parties only repair half of that. Lets say these numbers are against a New Mexico. The damage is 20k plus 2 fires that had to burn at max for whatever reason. That's 39,080/53,200 gone in 60 seconds. Repair party can repair all but 10k of that technically speaking. However at the unmodified 14% - it would take all 4 repairs to fix both the damage from both fires AND the damage from the penetrations. And that still means 6 minutes untouched to get back to 80% health. Good luck in a BB that slow. And 25% of rounds penning a target causing 2 fires that burn out all the way - not exactly outlandish numbers to achieve. The nearly automatic penetrations are as deadly, if not more so, then the fires. IV: Wargaming's last suggested solution - So, before IFHE the issue is the inconsistency of fires being started in higher tiers where HE can't pen, and post IFHE the issue is that the penetrations alone are as deadly as the fires due to volume, let alone if they do start fires with no actual way to lessen the damage by angling or any other means. So - what does Wargaing's solution posted up on July 3rd look like? Tier 5 and below BB's a 152 mm gun still punches trough unaided, Tier 6 and 7 ships with 152 mm guns can pen tier 6 and 7 BB's/8-10 cruisers with IFHE, but cannot pen tier 8+ BB's at all, while tier 8+ 152 mm ships still punch through same tier BB's. Basically - little to no change on penetration other than Tier 8-10 BB's being immune to lower tier CL. Which brings us back to both the past and current issue with IFHE and HE vs BB's. The new IFHE would cut fire chance 50%. That means while tier 8-10 CL are fine just because they can autopen BB's still are fine - but tier 6 and 7 cruisers that take it to deal with the same tier BB's and higher tier cruisers are screwed against BB's they can see pretty often. So, obviously they can not take it, and keep the fire chance, but basically then anything not a same tier CA on the list is immune and are 100% relying on fires and superstructure hits. No real change in one tier range, the other stays broken or goes back to the way it used to be broken. Not to mention potential ramifications on DD's that use it or a ship like Atlanta. Best case scenario here you maybe fix things at high tier while causing issues in lower tiers, worst case, something on par with the wreck that was the launch, and mostly still is, the CV rework. V: How else to address the problem? - So - IFHE as it is is kind of a problem. Removing it to the old way, also a problem. The proposed changes a month ago - the potential to at the same time change too much and not enough at the same time. So - what can be done to fix it? The funny thing here is for a good while, and to some degree still do, go after Wargaming on CV changes because instead of nerfing an issue directly, like the fact Hak's torp alpha is too high, they nerf around it like changing the way the planes aim, or removing the 4x plane option. This time they go to nerf it directly - when the best option is actually changing things around it. I can't say for certain any one of these alone would be the solution, likely, it would be a combination of things, but all would go a ways to help it. Reduce fire damage of BB's - DD's, CA/L and BB's once all had 18% fire damage, and CV 24%. CV's are down to 2%, almost immediately after IFHE was added cruisers and DD's were dropped to 9%, yet BB's remained 18% - even as cruisers and DD's started getting heals, the one loose justification for the difference. And I'm not even saying nerf them that much - maybe just bring it that BB's and large cruisers are in the same range as Graf Spee. This would allow IFHE to stay unchanged, while reducing the damage just a bit from the fires started - they keep the consistency to pen targets and BB's regain some durability due to less fire damage. Changes to DCP - Having played Gascogne, I do believe lowering the base premium (or possibly if they do the 1 consumable thing just base) cooldown to 40 seconds could go a good way toward helping, maybe lower Gas and Mass's to say 30 seconds to keep the uniqueness? Tweaks to Repair Party - There are multiple teaks that can be done here. Faster cooldown like Gas and Mass, change the pen damage repair percent, repair percent in general, how fast it repairs the damage or some combination of those. Reducing/removing the modifiers - putting aside that I've long felt the "different tiers have more slots" bit should have faded away long ago, it would in general be easier to balance if we don't have to worry about if someone has a no bonuses yo repair party or reduction in fire damage, or all of them. If we use the example from the first suggestion here BB's and 'super cruisers' burn for 13.5% health, DD's and normal cruisers 9%, CV's for 2% - no more, no less per fire. We could always leave one thing, but aside from easier to know and balance around the damage dealt/taken by fires this would open up in combination with possibly the other changes here the option of new Mods and a new skill and more ability to have some choice and variety not pretty much defaulting to DCMS 2 in slot 4 or likely taking BoS just to fight fires. Changing how fire works - maybe fires need to be a little more like detonations. By that I mean once the HP of the magazine hits 0, it starts rolling for a detonation. Perhaps to make fires more consistent, and reduce the need for it, would be if as sections take damage, the fire resistance is reduced making it easier to set that part of the ship on fire at least. Possibly others I forgot or haven't thought of yet. Other than maybe number 5 (it would likely see either the IFHE change Wargming proposed or it'd removal) these would allow the 30% buff to stay, allowing the consistency to stay, if we don't just change the formula overall so that it's not needed, while leaving the ability to set fires intact but cut down somewhat on the ability of mainly 152 mm guns to simply overwhelm all forms of damage control and bring some durability back to BB's if the RNG damage is a bit lower. I think a bit more reasonable and equitable for all parties.
  13. Admiral_Bingo

    RN CL Dido Premium Proposal

    Hello everyone, This is my first post. :) I would like to suggest this ship as a new premium and like to discuss what would it be like if it was actually added to the game. HMS Dido The reason why I chose this ship is because I would like to entertain the thought of having a RN Atlanta. Having similar armament, it would have a reload time around 5 seconds and just like the Atlanta, have unlimited charges of the DFAA consumable because of its AA build. Some difference would be the shell type. Being a RN cruiser, it can only fire AP shells with the special RN ballistics while Atlanta could fire both types. While the Atlanta has HE and Radar, Dido trades these off for heal and smoke, making it different in terms of handling from Atlanta and Flint. However, because of its armament, it would have similar range like the Atlanta requiring the player to adapt to a similar game play of Atlanta. So what specs, consumables, or other stuff should the ship have while keeping it relatively balanced?
  14. Why dont we give Indianapolis a Shark themed camo? I mean Worchester gets one now
  15. The need to hump islands always irks me as a requirement to play USN light cruisers. So while I was grinding down the cruiser lines an experiment was conducted on a different play style. The result shows that the alternative play style is viable. The alternative play style suggest is simply, not hump islands. Using the great concealment of USN cruisers to its fullest advantage. Using Seattle as an example, at full concealment the detection range of the ship is a mere 9.37 km. Not only the detection range is lower than any ship that can pose serious threats to Seattle. The range is also lower than the radar rage (9.45 km). This means that Seattle can always spot any ship that can kill her with artillery first and also can react to unspotted underage botes with proper radar usage. This is a powerful combination open to exploitation, especially open to exploitation in OPEN WATER (scary I know). In comparison, cruisers such as Zao or Hindenburg have at least 1 km more in detection range and thus can be easily avoided by the stealthy USN Cruisers if required. The low detection range allows the ships to closely support friendly DDs fighting for objective at the start the match. It also allows the ships not to be restricted to map features and be very unpredictable during the match and can surprise opponents. This alternative play style requires constant vigilance in regard to all the enemies's LoS and track any potential spotter at all time. It is not as easy as just sit behind a rock bow on and holding down the mouse button, but it sure is hella more fun. The Build for Seattle is here (ship and cpt): http://bit.ly/2K1r1y4 The flow of the battle is generally the following: 1. match starts, move with your friendly DD into key areas (obj or choke), stay close with the forward DD but not so close that you are the one being spotted first by red DDs. To achieve this, it is important to know the camo values of your own DD as well as any potential red DDs coming your way. You also should keep in mind enemy fast ship's camo ratings, such as cruisers, so you can deduce if the enemy DDs are being supported or is alone. 2. Once friendly DD spots enemy DDs, turn, mid turn, open fire on enemy DDs, do as much damage as you can while the turn is on going, then once the 180's complete, stop firing and go back to stealth. If you are a good marks man, you should have completely surprise against red DDs, 2 or 3 salvos is enough to cripple any DDs within 9.5 km of you and your friendly DDs and other ships can do the rest. - if the enemy DD is unsupported or supported by light ships, press on with your friendly DD even closer, use your radar and hydro to kill the enemy DDs outright. - you will take damage doing this, but your HP really doesn't matter in fact lower HP helps to boost your DPM with AR, find out why below. 3. if enemy capital ships are spotted, re-stealth, and move back to a position that's at least 15km away, with plotting room module the ship can achieve 18.22km firing range. A very comfortable range to harrass all BBs and camping cruisers with very little risk to yourself. At more than 15 km range, incoming shell travel time will be > than your rudder turn and with engine module equipped > your acceleration time. It means that you can comfortably dodge incoming AP shells, even if you are broadside on. The chance to get hit in the citadel, one shotted or even hitting you at all is EXTREMELY low, if you are vigilant enough to keep track of incoming shells and potential capital ships with LoS. Tried using both engine module and rudder shift, the better acceleration provided by engine module is far better than decrease in rudder shift time in this context. 4. Set everything on fire. This is where the fun begins. You should have longer range than almost all other island humpers, and at long range your shells will drop straight down, and enemy campers will have no where to hide, no rock can protect them from your sky shells. Even the ones that can match your range (like Worcester), since they are humping islands and thus stationary, you will land more hits on them than they do to you. That is if they can see you in the first place, because you've routed or killed their DD in step 1 & 2. If there are enemy BBs in key positions, such as a Yamato bow on holding down a flank, harass them and force them to move. If there are cruisers holding down a position behind an island, force them to move with your sky shells. The beauty with 18.22 km range is that you can support other key areas on the map more easily. - keep an eye out on random smokes around the map, you can put them between you and potential enemy spotters and you can remain stealthed while still firing in open water. This is easier said than done, and really requires eyes to be fixated on the minimap. But once if you master it, WoWS in its entirety is your oyster. My DD experience helps greatly in this regard. - also calculate where you can sail and put potential map features to their fullest LoS blocking potential. It doesn't mean hump an island, but simply put it between you and any potential spotters. - keep scanning all enemy ships, especially capital ships. The reason is to find opportunities to fire without getting any retaliation. For example, a Yamato needs almost a min to turn their turrets, so if you surprise one from opposite direction of their guns, you can just sit there for a min and do whatever without any risk of retaliation. 18 in guns can't do nothing if they are not aiming at you. - the general idea in this phase is to force enemies out of favorable positions. If they choose to stay, with IFHE and great rate of fire and fire chance. You can easily help to destroy even a Yamato or Kurfurst. - you are NOT kiting. Kiting is firing while running away, if you do that in light cruisers you will have a bad time, because you'll still be constantly detected and even from your stern BBs can punch clean through into your citadel. It is "hit and run", once you scanned enemies with LoS to you and determined the chance of being focused is low, let it rip. Once enemies start to target you, re-stealth and relocate. While relocation move to a direction opposite of where the enemies are pointing their guns. Then fire again. If no one bothers you, just keep firing. If you are firing from 15-18 km range, chances are you will be ignored because no one likes to miss their salvos on a dodging cruisers that far away. So you weave in and out of enemy LoS as well as weaving between several positions. 5. Mop up, all remaining enemies near the end of a match should all have vastly inferior camo values. You can pick your targets at will, hit and run, or sneak up and open with a broadside of AP at 9 km against other cruisers. The few, if at all, surviving DDs can only spot you if they enter your radar range. So if you are stealthed, but they suddenly spotted and can't see anything, that means a DD is within your radar range. Your hydro will also make torpedo attacks pointless and is a great alternative to detect enemies doing going around the rosy near islands. This means by yourself alone you can zone out and pick apart any surviving enemy ships. People should try some alternative ways to play light cruisers, especially the more experienced among you. Since this strategy really requires the player to have good knowledge of potential enemies as well as maps. As the pictures above suggest, this play style is tried on Baltimore, Seattle, and the new Cleveland.
  16. When you initial plan no longer works what do you do? You reposition and find another location to win the game. Those of you struggling with the Seattle may find this useful. Or you can Free Exp past it, but at least watch this video first.
  17. The DD and cruiser legendary upgrades are all beyond god like. In comparison, BB's upgrades are just suck. No BB in their right mind would take the new rudder shift and fire control buff to get in closer. Because that's not the main reason BBs die quickly. The improvements in rudder shift time is pointless, just... in what situation currently people playing BBs think to themselves "geeeez 1 sec faster rudder shift would've so carry the game there" - almost never. WG should stop inflating T10 performances with "upgrade" modules. People don't like to play T8 or above because the economy suck, not because they don't like powerful ships.
×