Search the Community

History In the mid 1920s the main fleets of South America were beginning to reformulate their naval plans. The most effective case was that of the Argentine Navy, which modernized its battleships and destroyers and acquired cruisers, destroyers and submarines, among other specific actions. But Argentina feared that Brazil and Chile would acquire new warships as well and, mainly, that they would ally against it in a triad (along with Uruguay). To respond to a threat of this magnitude, what Domecq García did (as head of the Argentine Navy) was to analyze which ships the rivals could acquire and which ships could be incorporated as a response. One of these ships is the one I suggest below. Edited illustration of heavy cruiser concept. Technical characteristics of the Argentine Heavy Cruiser of 1925/8 - Type: Heavy Cruiser. - Cost: 2,350,000 £. - Dimensions: ~195.0 × ~21.0 meters. - Displacement: standard 10,000 long tons & complete ~15,000 long tons. - Engine power: ~90,000 horsepower. - Fuel: ~5,000 long tons. - Range: 14,000 nautical miles. - Maximum speed: 30.0 knots. - Belt protection: ~50.0 millimetres. - Deck protection: ~25.0 + ~25.0 millimetres. - Main guns: 12 (4×III, 12|12) 203mm/50cs (símil Vickers Mark D). - Secondary guns: ~8 (8×I, 4|4) 120mm/45cs (símil Vickers-Armstrong Marca F AA). - Torpedo launchers: 12 (4×III, 6|6) 533mm (símil Armstrong Triple Modelo 1927). - Antiaircraft guns: ~8 (4×II) 40mm/39cs (símil Pompom). - Aircraft: ~2. - Complement: ~1,000 people. As it was an idea and not a blueprint/project that gives us the maximum of details, what I did was complement the general characteristics based on the designs of Vickers No. 910/9111 and No. 923/924 (offered to Spain) and No. 1208 (offered to Chile). To complement the real data, what I did was take analogous ships as reference values (mainly the "Canarias" class and the "Zara"). These values are marked with a symbol ("~"). Also, so that this heavy cruiser does not seem like a completely imaginary product, what I will do is couple real technical elements. And among these I highlight the use of projectiles and torpedoes that were in service in the Argentine Navy during the late 1920s and early 1930s. I admit that I have not been able to check the general characteristics in a specialized program. Perhaps this can yield new results, suggestions and modifications to this proposal. Implementation in WoWs of the Argentine Heavy Cruiser of 1925/8 In my opinion it can work as a Panamerican tier IX heavy cruiser researchable or special. In the event that it is considered researchable, this should be the "stock hull" version of it, that is, non-elite and suitable for improvements. If we have to compare this idea with an already implemented ship, I think we will agree that the Italian tier IX "Brindisi" comes to mind. Perhaps the key differences are that the Pan American has less speed and armor, but more torpedo launchers. I'll ignore the american tier IX "Buffalo" because, while she has a main armament with the same configuration, she doesn't have a torpedo launchers. Name - Label: "Domecq García" is my suggestion. Hitpoints - Average: 33,800 hp. - Stock: 28,950 hp. - Elite: 38,700 hp. Maneuverability - Engine power: 90,000 hp. - Maximum speed: 30.0 ks. Protection - Belt: 50 mm. - Deck: 25 + 25 mm. Main guns - Mark and Model: 203mm/50cs V. Marca D. - Configuration: 12 (4×III, 12|12). - Rate of fire: 4.0 rpm. - Reload time: 15.0 s. - Rotation: ~7.0 dps. - Range: ~17.0 km. - Dispersion: ~140 m. Piercing Projectile - Mark and model: AP G.P. - Singular damage: 4,300 hp. [Brindisi: 4,800 hp] - Barrage damage: 51,350 hp. [Brindisi: 57,600 hp] - Damage in barrage per minute: 205,350 hp. [Brindisi: 172,800 hp] - Penetration: 383 mm. [Brindisi: 479 mms] - Muzzle speed: 900 mps. [Brindisi: 950 mps] - Weight: 95.3 kg. [Brindisi: 125.3 kg] Explosive Projectile (Alternative/Optional) - Mark and model: HE A.E.B.N. - Singular damage: 2,900 hp. - Barrage damage: 34,500 hp. - Damage in barrage per minute: 138,000 hp. - Fire chances: 16 %. - Penetration: 34 mm. - Muzzle speed: 900 mps. - Weight: 95.3 kg. Semi-Armor-Piercing Projectile (Alternative/Optional) - Mark and model: SAP G.O. - Singular damage: 5,100 hp. [Brindisi: 5,200 hp] - Barrage damage: 61,300 hp. [Brindisi: 62,400 hp] - Damage in barrage per minute: 245,200 hp. [Brindisi: 187,200 hp] - Penetration: 54 mm. [Brindisi: 54 mm] - Muzzle speed: 900 mps. [Brindisi: 950 mps] - Weight: 95.3 kg. [Brindisi: 125.3 kg] Secondary guns - Mark and model: 120mm/45cs C.V. Marca F AA. - Configuration: 8 (8×I, 4|4). - Rate of fire: 15.0 rpm. - Reload time: 4.0 s. - Range: 5.0 km. Explosive Projectile - Mark and model: HE 22.7 kg. - Singular damage: 2,000 hp. - Barrage damage: 8,000 hp. - Damage in barrage per minute: 120,000 hp. - Muzzle speed: 853 mps. - Fire chances: 6 %. Torpedo launchers - Mark and Model: Armstrong Triple. - Configuration: 12 (4×III, 3|3) 533mm. - Rate of fire: ~0.75 lpm. - Reload time: ~80 s. Torpedo - Mark & Model: Wh1930AR. - Range: 10.0 km. - Speed: 50 kn. - Damage: 12,350 hp. - Damage in barrage: 74,100 hp. - Damage in barrage per minute: 55,600 hp. - Flood: 207 %. Antiaircraft guns - Short distance: 8 × 40mm + X × 7.7mm. - Medium distance: 8 x 120mm. - Long distance: 12 x 203mm? Aircraft - Type: Fighter or Spotter. Consumables - Slot 1: Damage Control Party. - Slot 2: Specialized Repair Teams. - Slot 3: Engine Boost or Hydroacoustic Search or Defensive Antiaircraft Fire. - Slot 4: Spotting Aircraft or Catapult Fighter. Pros - Number of guns. - Number of launchers. - Projectile arc. - Projectile velocity. - SAP or not to SAP?. - Low citadel. Cons - Worse 203mm AP. - Torpedoes speed. - Weak antiaircraft defense (). - Poor armour. - Low speed. Final Veredict The weight of the projectiles is key for penetration and damage generation, since it is very low (95.3 kg) and threatens these results. And although there is the chance to use other heavier projectiles (113.4 kg), the ones presented here seemed adequate to me because they are the most important in Argentine service and to justify a high rate of fire that can even be raised by half or more points. The weight of the projectiles is key to penetration and damage generation. I chose these 203-millimeter low-weight projectiles (95.3 kg) because they were the most modern and important in the Argentine service (of the “Buenos Aires” and “San Martín” cruisers). And although other heavier historical projectiles (113.4 kg) can be used, the ones presented here seemed adequate to justify a high rate of fire, which even for the selected weapon can be raised by half or one point, if we need it. It is also convenient to point out that if the restricted use of AP proyectiles is abandoned (as is the case in the current Panamerican Light Cruiser Branch) a better performance can be obtained on the ship presented here. If HE projectiles is allowed, itcan be an effective against destroyers. If the use of SAP projectiles is allowed, it can be competent against cruisers. But without any of the above I don't think it will hold up against battleships. The speed and damage of the torpedoes is not key but it is not good. Although it does fit the models used in the early 1930s, which is important, in case of making a historical representation. The protection is dreadful. The Specialized Repair Teams consumable will be key and a low citadel is suggested. It will be a cruiser to be used at a distance or hidden behind islands. Anyway, I didn't assign smoke to it so as not to repeat the gameplay of similar ships. In the event that it is approached by an enemy, its defense will be the torpedo launchers. As presented, it seems acceptable to me that the heavy cruiser is implemented as a premium tier IX, although it will need some adjustments. It can't be an elite research tier IX by any means, as it will require more pronounced upgrades there. Hope you like it guys. Regards

In the late nineteen-teens, the USN conducted an exercise where one force of dreadnought battleships (BLUE) would try to prevent two forces of pre-dreadnoughts (RED) from linking up. BLUE failed to not only to prevent the forces of RED from linking up, but even from finding RED within the search area. The cause of this was heavy weather and the effects it had on the destroyer force which BLUE used to try and find RED. It was realized that while destroyers could outrun any other ship during calm weather, this was not the during rougher sea states. During the exercise, the destroyers only managed around 9 kts, where even the older pre-dreadnoughts, with their lower freeboards, could easily maintain 15 kts. It was also observed during an earlier exercise that in even rougher seas, the destroyers had to leave the search area for fear of floundering (something that would be seen in action in WWII). The obvious solution to this was to use larger ships for scouting. The ships developed during the design study were initially designed with either ten 6-inch guns or four 12-inch guns, with later designs even being given 14 or 16-inch guns and most were designed for a speed of 35 kts. While no ships were built from these designs, they did lay the foundation for the Omaha-Class. Sticking to the USN naming convention for cruisers, these ships are named for US cities. Aside from the Albuquerque, which is the start of this left turn on the USN cruiser branch, the ships are named after towns that have Court House in their name, as I am sure that they, and the line as a whole, will be judged harshly. As a line, these ships will be fast, all sharing the same speed of 35 kts. The Tier VI-VIII ships also have no belt armor, as they were designed to be completely unarmored. The Battle Scouts, that is the scouts with Battleship main armament, could be classified in two ways during the 1919 study: the first by armament (2x2 12", 2x1 14", 2x2 14", and 2x2 16") and the second being by armor (none, 4" belt, and 8" belt). The 'Court House' Classes are drawn from this portion of the study, where Design 115 was from a bit earlier. As these ships were designed to fulfill the function of destroyers, I have largely given them destroyer consumables, like American Destroyer smoke and a slightly upgraded Engine Boost. The ships were equipped to carry spotting aircraft, which is reflected in their consumables, and the Heavy Repair Party is used because these ships will eat a lot of citadel damage, especially at tiers VI-VIII. Note: The full displacement of these ships is derived from the weight charts, by calculating the various stores that are listed at 2/3rd, multiplying them by 1.5, and then adding up the other weights. They do not reflect the proposed modernization that I have given them and the health in parenthesis is what the health would be using this approximate full displacement, which could assist in balancing. Tier VI Battle Scout 115 Albuquerque-Class Displacement: 12,600t normal (13,956t full, approx.) Health:33,600 (36,250) Armor Torpedo Protection: 4.0% Plating: 16mm Main Belt: 16mm Main Deck: 16mm Barbettes: 152mm Turret Face: 25mm Citadel Bulkhead: 25mm Citadel Athwartship: 25mm Citadel Roof: 25mm Length: 720’ (219.46m) Beam: 59’ (17.98m) Speed: 35.0 kts E.H.P.: 62,500 (approx between 93,750 and 125,000 SHP) Rudder Shift: 8.0s Turning Circle: 710m Detectability By Air/Sea: 6.6km/12.2km Main Armament 2x2 305mm/50 Mk.7 in a turret Reload: 30.0s Range: 14.3 km Turret 180º: 30.0s Dispersion: 116m Horizontal/64m Vertical @ 12.0km Sigma: 2.0σ 1 – 305mm HE Max Damage: 4,200 Fire Chance: 22.0% Shell Pen: 51mm Muzzle Velocity: 884 m/s 2 – 305mm AP Max Damage: 8,300 Muzzle Velocity: 884 m/s Secondary Armament 7x1 152mm/50 Mk.8 on a Mk.10 mount Reload: 10.0s Max Damage: 2,100 Fire Chance: 7.0% Penetration: 25mm Range: 5.0km Muzzle Velocity: 853 m/s Anti-Aircraft Armament 4x1 76mm/50 Mk.22 on a single mount Medium Range AA Continuous Damage: 21 Range: 3.5km Consumables R – Damage Control Party (5s Duration; 60s Cooldown) T – Heavy Repair Party (2.0%/sec; 50% Health; 33% Citadel; 20s Duration; 80s Cooldown) Y – Smoke Generator (0.45km radius; 30s Duration; 118s Dispersion; 160s Cooldown) U – Engine Boost (+12.5% Speed; 120s Duration; 120s Cooldown) I – Spotting Aircraft Tier VII Battle Scout 118 Appomattox Court House-Class Displacement: 14,350 (~15,752) Health: 37,000 Armor Torpedo Protection: 4.0% Plating: 13mm Main Belt: 16mm Upper Belt: 16mm Main Deck: 16mm Barbettes: 25mm Turret Face: 25mm Turret Sides: 25mm Turret Rear: 25mm Turret Roof: 25mm Citadel Bulkhead: 25mm Citadel Athwartship: 25mm Citadel Roof: 25mm Length: 720’ (219.46m) Beam: 69’ (21.03m) Speed: 35.0 kts E.H.P.: 62,500 (approx between 93,750 and 125,000 SHP) Rudder Shift: 8.2s Turning Circle: 720m Detectability By Air/Sea: 7.0km/12.8km Main Armament 2x2 305mm/45 Mk.5 in a turret Reload: 30.0s Range: 15.6km Turret 180º: 30.0s Dispersion: 116m Horizontal/64m Vertical @ 12.0km Sigma: 2.0σ 1 – 305mm HE Max Damage: 4,100 Fire Chance: 20.0% Shell Pen: 51mm Muzzle Velocity: 823 m/s 2 – 305mm AP Max Damage: 8,100 Muzzle Velocity: 823m/s Secondary Armament 7x1 127mm/25 Mk.19 on a Mk.19 mount Reload: 4.5s Max Damage: 1,800 Fire Chance: 9.0% Penetration: 21mm Range: 5.6km Muzzle Velocity: 657 m/s Anti-Aircraft Armament 7x1 127mm/25 Mk.19 on a Mk.19 mount 6x4 40mm/56 Bofors on a Mk.2 mount 20x2 20mm/70 Oerlikon on a Mk.24 mount Long Range AA Flak Burst: 74 Flak Damage: 1,330 Continuous Damage: 74 Range: 4.8 km Medium Range AA Continuous Damage: 175 Range: 3.5 km Short Range AA Continuous Damage: 300 Range: 2.0 km Consumables R – Damage Control Party (5s Duration; 60s Cooldown) T – Heavy Repair Party (2.0%/sec; 50% Health; 33% Citadel; 20s Duration; 80s Cooldown) Y – Smoke Generator (0.45km radius; 30s Duration; 121s Dispersion; 160s Cooldown) U – Engine Boost (+12.5% Speed; 120s Duration; 120s Cooldown) I – Spotting Aircraft Tier VIII Battle Scout 124 Charlotte Court House-Class Displacement: 15,500t normal (19,875t full, approx.) Health: 39,200 (47,500) Armor Torpedo Protection: 4.0% Plating: 16mm Main Belt: 25mm Upper Belt: 25mm Main Deck: 25mm Barbettes: 27mm Turret Face: 25mm Turret Sides: 25mm Turret Rear: 25mm Turret Roof: 25mm Citadel Bulkhead: 27mm Citadel Athwartship: 27mm Citadel Roof: 27mm Length: 760’ (231.65m) Beam: 71’ (21.64m) Speed: 35.0 kts E.H.P.: 64,000 (approx between 96,000 and 128,000 SHP) Rudder Shift: 8.6s Turning Circle: 710m Detectability By Air/Sea: 7.0km/12.8km Main Armament 2x2 356mm/45 Mk 8 in a turret Reload: 30.0s Range: 14.3 km Turret 180º: 30.0s Dispersion: 116m Horizontal/64m Vertical @ 12.0km Sigma: 2.0σ 1 – 356mm HE/HC Mk22 Max Damage: 5,000 Fire Chance: 30.0% Shell Pen: 59mm Muzzle Velocity: 834 m/s 2 – 356mm AP Mk16 Max Damage: 10,300 Muzzle Velocity: 792 m/s Secondary Armament 7x1 127mm/38 Mk.12 on a Mk.30 mod.0 mount Reload: 3.0s Max Damage: 1,800 Fire Chance: 5.0% Penetration: 21mm Range: 6.6km Muzzle Velocity: 792 m/s Anti-Aircraft Armament 7x1 127mm/38 Mk.12 on a Mk.30 mod.0 mount 6x4 40mm/56 Bofors on a Mk.2 mount 20x2 20mm/70 Oerlikon on a Mk.24 mount Long Range AA Flak Burst: 5 Flak Damage: 1,540 Continuous Damage: 100 Range: 5.8km Medium Range AA Continuous Damage: 200 Range: 3.5km Short Range AA Continuous Damage: 200 Range: 2.0km Consumables R – Damage Control Party (5s Duration; 60s Cooldown) T – Repair Party (2.0%/sec; 50% Health; 33% Citadel; 20s Duration; 80s Cooldown) Y – Smoke Generator (0.45km radius; 30s Duration; 124s Dispersion; 160s Cooldown) U – Engine Boost (+12.5% Speed; 120s Duration; 120s Cooldown) I – Spotting Aircraft Tier IX Battle Scout 125 King and Queen Court House-Class Displacement: 19,500t normal (21,671 full, approx.) Health: 46,800 (51,000) Armor Torpedo Protection: 7% Plating: 16mm Main Belt: 102mm Upper Belt: 25mm Main Deck: 25mm Barbettes: 38mm Turret Face: 38mm Turret Sides: 25mm Turret Rear: 25mm Turret Roof: 25mm Citadel Bulkhead: 25mm Citadel Athwartship: 25mm Citadel Roof: 38mm Length: 760’ (219.46m) Beam: 77’ (23.47m) Speed: 35.0 kts E.H.P.: 76,500 (approx. between 114,750 and 153,000 SHP) Rudder Shift: 8.8s Turning Circle: 740m Detectability By Air/Sea: 7.0km/12.8km Main Armament 2x2 356mm/50 Mk.11 in a turret Reload: 25.0s Range: 16.5km Turret 180º: 30.0s Dispersion: 116m Horizontal/64m Vertical @ 12.0km Sigma: 2.05σ 1 – 356mm HC/HE Mk22 mod 1 Max Damage: 4,750 Fire Chance: 22.0% Shell Pen: 59mm Muzzle Velocity: 861m/s 2 – 356mm AP Mk16 mod 1 Max Damage: 9,500 Muzzle Velocity: 823m/s Secondary Armament 6x1 127mm/38 Mk.12 on a Mk.30 mod.0 mount Reload: 3.0s Max Damage: 1,800 Fire Chance: 5.0% Penetration: 21mm Range: 6.6km Muzzle Velocity: 792m/s 3x2 127mm/38 Mk.12 on a Mk.32 mount Reload: 6.0s Max Damage: 1,800 Fire Chance: 5.0% Penetration: 21mm Range: 6.6km Muzzle Velocity: 792m/s Anti-Aircraft Armament 6x1 127mm/38 Mk.12 on a Mk.30 mod.0 mount 3x2 127mm/38 Mk.12 on a Mk.32 mount 12x4 40mm/56 Bofors on a Mk.2 mount 25x2 20mm/70 Oerlikon on a Mk.24 mount Long Range AA Flak Burst: 5 Flak Damage: 1,610 Continuous Damage: 100 Range: 5.8km Medium Range AA Continuous Damage: 350 Range: 3.5km Short Range AA Continuous Damage: 300 Range: 2.0km Consumables R – Damage Control Party (5s Duration; 60s Cooldown) T – Repair Party (2.0%/sec; 50% Health; 50% Citadel; 20s Duration; 80s Cooldown) Y – Smoke Generator (0.45km radius; 30s Duration; 127s Dispersion; 160s Cooldown) U – Engine Boost (+12.5% Speed; 120s Duration; 120s Cooldown) I – Spotting Aircraft Tier X Battle Scout 131 Washington Court House-Class Displacement: 20,500t normal (22,320t full, approx.) Health: 48,750 (52,200) Armor Torpedo Protection: 7% Plating: 16mm Main Belt: 102mm Upper Belt: 25mm Main Deck: 25mm Barbettes: 38mm Turret Face: 38mm Turret Sides: 25mm Turret Rear: 25mm Turret Roof: 25mm Citadel Bulkhead: 25mm Citadel Athwartship: 25mm Citadel Roof: 38mm Length: 760’ (219.46m) Beam: 77’ (23.47m) Speed: 35.0 kts E.H.P.: 76,500 (approx. between 114,750 and 153,000 SHP) Rudder Shift: 9.2s Turning Circle: 720m Detectability By Air/Sea: 7.0km/12.8km Main Armament 2x2 406mm/50 Mk.2 in a turret Reload: 25.0s Range: 16.5km Turret 180º: 30.0s Dispersion: 116m Horizontal/64m Vertical @ 12.0km Sigma: 2.05σ 1 – 406mm HE/HC Max Damage: 5,700 Fire Chance: 36.0% Shell Pen: 68mm Muzzle Velocity: 853m/s 2 – 406mm AP Mark 3 Max Damage: 12,600 Muzzle Velocity: 853m/s Secondary Armament 6x1 127mm/54 Mk.16 on a Mk.39 mount Reload: 4.0s Max Damage: 1,800 Fire Chance: 9.0% Penetration: 21mm Range: 7.3km Muzzle Velocity: 808m/s 3x2 127mm/64 Mk.16 on a Mk.41 mount Reload: 6.0s Max Damage: 1,800 Fire Chance: 9.0% Penetration: 21mm Range: 7.3km Muzzle Velocity: 808m/s Anti-Aircraft Armament 6x1 127mm/54 Mk.16 on a Mk.39 mount 3x2 127mm/64 Mk.16 on a Mk.41 mount 12x2 76.2mm/50 Mk.22 on Mk.33 mount 25x2 20mm/70 Oerlikon on a Mk.24 mount Long Range AA Flak Burst: 7 Flak Damage: 1,680 Continuous Damage: 150 Range: 6.0km Medium Range AA Continuous Damage: 475 Range: 4.0km Short Range AA Continuous Damage: 300 Range: 2.0km Consumables R – Damage Control Party (5s Duration; 60s Cooldown) T – Repair Party (2.0%/sec; 50% Health; 50% Citadel; 20s Duration; 80s Cooldown) Y – Smoke Generator (0.45km radius; 30s Duration; 127s Dispersion; 160s Cooldown) U – Engine Boost (+12.5% Speed; 120s Duration; 120s Cooldown) I – Spotting Aircraft

Well I said my next project would be proposing a Commonwealth cruiser line, so here it is. In the absence of T9-10 options that aren't straight clones of Neptune and Minotaur (or British export designs offered to South America and thus better-suited for the Pan-America line) and because of several Australian CA designs, I opted to make it a heavy cruiser rather than light cruiser line. This also differentiates the tech tree from the existing Commonwealth CL premiums yet also retaining the signature Crawling Smoke Generator consumable. I had to revise this line because just less than a month ago my long-intended Tier 10 choice was announced as a British premium. But what's bad for uniqueness within the line might be better for keeping a coherent line progression. With 190mm guns at T4, it's the lowest tier transition from CL to CA of any tech tree. Tier I: HMCS Prince David For T1 we could do a lazy copy-paste of one of the Black Swan class of India or Pakistan, but there's something more interesting. A passenger liner. No really. HMCS Prince David is a relatively small (5700 ton) passenger liner that was converted to an armed merchant cruiser. She was surprisingly cruiser-like in appearance after the conversion with 4x1 152mm guns in AB-XY superfiring pairs. Which might have saved her when she allegedly encountered Admiral Hipper in 1941; since German cruisers on surface raiding missions were supposed to avoid battle with enemy cruisers to avoid damage. But in reality this reported confrontation was probably invented for propaganda, and what she really chased off was a supply ship for U-boats or at most one of Germany's disguised auxiliary cruisers. I have no idea what if any formula WG uses to come up with HP pools of T1 cruisers. It's not the same that they use for other cruisers. So I'm arbitrarily giving Prince David 10k HP. She's an ocean liner hull, the only armor is the gun shields. She's also the biggest target with the worst concealment of any T1. She needs a big HP to survive. Tier II: HMAS Encounter Challenger class protected cruiser At T2 we use the Challenger class protected cruiser HMAS Encounter. (Gratuitous ship's cat photo now.) She has a very hefty armament of 11x1 152mm guns with up to 6 gun broadside, so I'm nerfing her muzzle velocity to 784m/s (the velocity using light instead of heavy charges) to make the shells floatier and reduce the AP alpha to 2800, and restricting the reload speed to 10 sec. I haven't been able to find any pictures that show her gun layout, but the preceding Highflyer class had the same layout: As a protected cruiser, she has no actual belt armor. Her protection is entirely from the deck armor. Most T2 cruisers are like this. When being shot from the front or rear she does get the advantage of 127mm engine room hatches, which mean part of the citadel athwartships is quite thick. Tier III: HMAS Adelaide Birmingham class light cruiser The CL HMAS Adelaide would be my choice for T3 (she's basically the British T2 Weymouth except with the addition of an extra 152mm gun and more importantly some actual armor). I'm choosing her instead of HMCS Niobe (which I see as T3 premium material) because of Adelaide's historical importance of actually being built in Australia and also to lead into the T4 cruiser. During WW2 her armament was rearranged so that she had only 7 guns but retained the same 5 gun broadside. But since those refits would be counterproductive in WOWS (the AA would still be bad even after the refit, and even after subs get added a T3 ship will never see them) I'd skip those.   Instead I'll go with a fictional blend of the 2 refits to create a B hull with a 6 gun broadside: Tier IV: HMAS Darwin Improved Birmingham Variant B HMAS Darwin is an enlarged alternative design that was considered for Adelaide, armed with 190mm guns in turrets all down the centerline. The longer hull and slightly increased horsepower also gives her 1 knot more speed. Gameplay-wise this is where the Crawling Smoke Generator makes its first appearance in the line. I'm also altering the design by adding a triple torpedo launcher on each side. Turret thickness in my stat sheet is guesswork based on the similar turrets of WW1 British armoured cruisers with 190mm guns, but it might be much thinner on account of the smaller ship. Tier V: HMNZS Canterbury Vickers Design 1242 While this Vickers export design was offered to Australia, I decided to spread things around a bit by giving her to New Zealand instead. The hull and armament are extremely similar to the British T5 premium Exeter. But as a Commonwealth CA she gets Crawling Smoke rather than Repair Party Tier VI: HMAS Australia Kent class heavy cruiser HMAS Australia is a ship that was actually built and saw extensive wartime service. She's a Kent class CA and thus half-sister to London and Devonshire. She has a thicker main belt than them, but it's not as tall. Whether that's good or bad depends on what's shooting at you. You'll probably get more pens but also more overpens from shells that go high rather than hitting the citadel, and the citadel itself is slightly better protected with the 127mm rather than 114mm belt. But since you don't have Repair Party, any damage you take is going to stick. Tier VII: HMAS Brisbane Cockatoo Naval Yard heavy cruiser design of 1924 At T7 we see the Cockatoo Naval Yard Heavy Cruiser of 1924, which uses a slightly enlarged version of the Hawkins hull but mounts 3x3 203mm guns. This one is an oddball on several levels. The casemated secondaries (an oddity even on the conceptual level for a heavy cruiser) are apparently American 5"/51s and the Hawkins hull is badly armored. But the main armament is such an obvious upgrade over Australia means she needs to be a tier higher. And the fact that she's an indigenous design of Australia's shipyard means she can't just be skipped over. Of all the paper ships of a Commonwealth CA line she's probably the most important one to include. But Australia herself is also too important to skip so I can't toss her at T6 and find something else to be T7. If her armor is kept the same as Hawkins she'll have a 38mm icebreaker but also a massive citadel that's only 64 to 76mm thick on belt along with citadel deck and bulkheads that are only 16mm thick in parts. Personally I'd just lower the citadel (though it's still above waterline) and beef up the belt armor around the citadel portion to 127mm. The B hull would probably also remove the casemate secondaries to make room for 102mm AA guns. Tier VIII: HMAS Newcastle Vickers Design 1074X Newcastle is Vickers Export Design 1074X, another 3x3 203mm cruiser. This is essentially an enlarged York class (or Vickers 1242) with triple turrets rather than being in the direct lineage of the British County class CAs. Another interesting feature is that it calls for 4x3 622mm torpedo tubes. IRL the only ships ever to mount this weapon (the 24.5" Mk I torpedo) were the Nelson class battleships in fixed underwater tubes. But despite the huge caliber these wouldn't hit any harder than British 533mm torps. They only had a 337kg warhead, actually a tiny bit smaller than the Mk IX series of torps that mid to high tier British cruisers carry. The purpose of the huge size was to increase range, with the lowest range setting being 13.7km at 35 knots (though remember that all ship launched torps have their speed in WOWS set to ~20 knots faster than IRL). I'm going to make fictional upgraded versions of these torps for the T9-10 CAs, just for "flavour" purposes. Given that British cruiser design of the time had near-nonexistent 25mm belts (to meet the 10k ton treaty weight limits) but were suspiciously easily to refit with thicker belts once the treaties were breached by Japan and Italy, probably the same is true of Vickers 1074X. So I'll just give her a 152mm belt and call it a day. Tier IX: INS Vikrant 1940 21,500 Ton Cruiser Design B At this point we've run out Australian CA designs, so I'm resorting to the leftovers that WG didn't use in the British CA line. T8-10 of that line are based on early 1940s British design studies for post-treaty heavy cruisers. But there are more such ships that WG didn't use. Bringing back the 9.2" (234mm) as a cruiser gun was Winston Churchill's pet project as First Lord of the Admiralty. After becoming PM he was less directly involved in naval affairs and that's when the project died. But one of these large cruisers was instead armed with 4x3 203mm and weighed in at 21500 tons standard (so maybe 23000 tons full load). That's the design I'm suggesting for T9. This is a hull very similar to Drake in the British line but with a larger number of smaller guns. I'm putting this one under the Indian flag as INS Vikrant. Tier X: HMCS Canada 4x4 203mm Goliath And here we have it, the dreaded copy-paste turret-swap. I'm left without any other options for this tier since the British T10 premium Gibraltar is using the design I'd originally wanted. But maybe it's better this way, since suddenly springing a 234mm gun cruiser at T10 after 5 straight tiers of 203mm wouldn't be the smoothest transition. I'm going to give this one to Canada under the name HMCS Canada. And here's some potential associated premiums: Tier III: HMCS Niobe Diadem class protected cruiser Niobe was the 2nd ship of the Royal Canadian Navy, and the 1st that's workable for this game. I chose her as a premium because she's just so different from the rest of the tree. She has a lot in common with St. Louis but there are a few differences. She has even more guns and better HE DPM, but worse AP DPM and much worse shell velocity. She has even bigger HP pool (800 more HP than South Carolina!) and a thicker turtleback deck over the citadel, but no belt armor at all. Tier III: HMAS Sydney Chatham class light cruiser Sydney is a direct predecessor of Adelaide. Largely the same ship as stock Adelaide but with 1 less gun. The layout is identical to British T2 Weymouth. But she's too strong for T2 so here she is. I'm just including her for historical importance as the ship that won the very first battle in the Royal Australian Navy's history. On November 9, 1914 she hunted down and defeated the German cruiser SMS Emden (already in WOWS as a T2 German premium) in the very one-sided Battle of Cocos. This is what Emden looked like afterward: To somewhat make up for the weaker armament she gets faster reload. Tier IV: HMCS Prince Robert d Prince Robert is the sister ship of the T1 cruiser Prince David. Initially she was given the same conversion as an armed merchant cruiser. While her sister ships were converted again to infantry landing ships for D-Day, Prince Robert was instead refitted as an AA escort. With 5 twin 102mm, a pair of quad 40mm pom-poms and 12 single 20mm Oerlikons she should be a bit of a surprise T4 CV players who are used to nonexistent AA. Those 10 fast-firing guns mean great DPM as well. But she's still a merchant ship hull with no armor, and unlike her T1 sister her HP pool is now rather low for the tier. Everything can pen her everywhere, including HE shells and rockets through the belt. She's also slow. The protected matchmaking spread of T4 isn't a luxury for her but a necessity. You'll need to make use of islands and your smokescreen to stay alive long enough to make use of the DPM. Tier V: HMAS Canberra Kent class heavy cruiser HMAS Canberra is Australia's is sister ship. She's a tier lower for a good reason though, which you'll be able to see in stats. The 25mm belt is not a typo. She's one of the County class that didn't have time to get refitted with a proper belt. Which probably didn't help at the Battle of Savo Island where she was lost, though the 3 New Orleans class cruisers with 127mm belts also sunk in that battle indicate it wouldn't have mattered. Otherwise she's pretty much a stock Australia. With arbitrarily lower shell velocity and AP alpha (same as the inaccurate velocity WG used for Devonshire). This is the definition of glass cannon cruiser. At one point I would've put Canberra in the tech tree at T6 and Australia at T7, with the Cockatoo heavy cruiser as a T7 premium. But cruiser powercreep starting with the USN cruiser split meant that ceased to be viable. And a no-belt-armor CA in the tech tree would've been awkward anyway. I didn't include the Dido class cruisers PNS Babur and HMNZS Royalist in my premium ideas because @Commissar_Carl already covered them in detail (the links are to his posts). There's also 1944 Australian light cruiser design that's essentially a mini-Neptune (4x3 133mm guns instead of 152mm) that would fit at T8. But aside from not being thematically related to the CA line, in the event that suitable T9-10 designs can be found other than copy-pasting Neptune and Minotaur she'd be a good fit for a Commonwealth CL split. Such a split could consist of T4 HMS Dunedin (a Danae clone representing the New Zealand Division of the Royal Navy; the Royal New Zealand Navy proper didn't come until 1941), T5 HMNZS Achilles/INS Delhi (the same ship, a Leander with 1 turret removed), T6 HMCS Quebec (ex-HMS Uganda, a Fiji with 1 turret removed like the premium Mysore) and T7 HMCS Ontario (an improved Fiji but still with only 3 turrets, could get buffed reload to fit into the tier). While the CL line would have fewer paper ships, it would also be less unique so I went with CAs. I would like the CL line to happen as well, maybe even just stopping at T8 until proper top-tier ships can be found like WG initially did with the IJN DD split. In the unlikely event that WG ever expands low-tier in the way I've proposed before by redesignating the T1 ships as "Tier 0" and putting small turn of the century cruisers and destroyers at T1 along with pre-dreadnought BBs at T1 and 2 (so that T1 would become part of the normal tiers instead of a walled-off training area) I'd put the small protected cruiser HMS (later HMNZS) Philomel at that new T1.

I thought on an Australian ship, just because, sue me, and I just want this as an idea HMAS Canberra (D33) *note this ship is an Kent sub class from the County class heavy cruiser) Ship Specs: Length: 630 ft 1 in (192.05 m) Width: 68.25 ft (20.80 m) Draught: 21 ft 4 in (6.50 m) maximum Displacement: 9,850 tons (light) 10,000 (standard) Armaments: 4 x 2 8in (203mm) guns 4 x 1 4 in AA guns 4 x 1 2 pounder (40mm) pom-poms 12-16 0.303 in machine guns (1942) x2 multiple pom-poms 5 x 1 Oerlikon 20mm AA guns 2 x 4 21 in (533 mm) torpedo tubes Armor: 1.5-3 in (38-76 mm) armor decks over machinery and magazines 2 in over guns 3 in on conning tower w. Anti Torpedo bulges Aircraft: (initially) Supermarine Seagull III (later) Supermarine Walrus ASW: Depth charge rack Machinery Specs: Propulsion: 8 Yarrow boilers, 4 shaft Brown-Curtis steam turbines Power: 80,000 hp Speed: 31.5 knots 12 knot cruising Range: 2,870 nmi @ 31.5 knots 13,200 @ 12 knots

I noticed the new high tier British CAs have 114 mm secondary batteries, as do the UK carriers. Are they good for anything except causing the occasional fire? Can they penetrate tier 8 - 10 destroyer hulls? Do the 114s on the new UK CAs get the increased HE penetration like the main batteries? Thanks!

I took a little break from the other few models I am working on to figure out some geometry on them. In the mean time I was dinking around with the idea of converting Graf Spee into the Deutschland. Deutschland's more famous sister is in the game. You Know, Graf Spee. She is more famous due to the battle of the river plate and was scuttled there. 5 ships were planned with only 3 being built. Deutschland was finished first and then Admiral Scheer, and finally Admiral Graf Zeppelin. Deutschland had her name changed to Lutzow because of the war starting and Hitler was very afraid of Deutschland being sank, and then used as propaganda by the Allies. It wouldn't look good to have a ship named after the nation sank. When Deutschland was launched and even before it started much speculation and shock around the worlds navies. It was obviously built to commerce raid and was superior to any heavy cruiser in the world. The British were concerned that they could really only deal with these ships with a few battle cruisers. It was the British press that coined the phrase (Pocket Battleship) in reference to this ship. I also want to give a shout out to modeler Maxromash for the models and kit bash materials that considerably speeds up the modeling process. Its hard to see, but I moved the rangefinders on the turrets to match the earlier model that was on Deutschland.

What’s so special about it? Pocket Battleships! While these ships will be Cruisers in-game, they’ll straddle the divide between Cruiser and Battleship, and their play style should reflect that. Armor good enough to tank other cruisers, but not enough to tank battleships. So, against cruisers, you’re kinda a battleship, and against full on battleships, you’re a heavy cruiser. Pros: Large guns. Never anything smaller than 11 inch guns. Good acceleration. All ships of the line have diesel powerplants or turbines, instead of steam. Heavy belt armor. Heaviest cruiser belts in the game. (Tier 9 losses to Kronshtadt). Strong Citadels. 50+ mm across the broadsides. Citadels don’t go to belt, aren’t apart of belt. German Hydro. Good secondaries for a cruiser. Good torpedo arcs and torpedoes have longer range than other German cruisers. Large Health Pools. Cons: Low turret count. Loss of a turret really hurts. Long reload for a cruiser. Large Citadels. Diesel engines are bulky, which leads to larger citadels. Large Ships. To accommodate the diesel engines, the ships had to be wide, and to keep the speed up, they had to be long. Decent AA. Heavy amount of 105mm guns (6-8 barrels total, 4 barrels per side on tier 4+). Generally low top speed. Burns for 45 seconds. Low DPM, do to long reloads. Relatively poor accuracy. Possible Special Consumable Options: German Radar (Short Duration, Short Range, Short Reload, High Number of Charges) Defensive Secondary Fire (Boosts Secondary Fire Rate) Tier III Prinz Adalbert-Class Slow turret rotation, but better rate of fire will make it not as terrible to play. Secondaries are still pretty terrible, though. Should play like a battleship. Secondary range should be 2.5km. No less than 9 second reload on the 150mm guns, probably closer to 12. The 88s should probably have a 5 or 6 second reload, max. Tier III -Premium- SMS Fürst Bismarck First of the Große Kreuzer (large cruisers) built by German, this ship didn’t have an exciting life. Slow and plodding, she, none-the-less, might be too much for tier II. Slow fire rate and turret rotation can help balance her out. Secondaries should be short ranged, slow firing, and bad dispersion. Range could be around 2km. No less than 9 second reload on the 150mm guns, probably closer to 12. The 88s should probably have a 5 or 6 second reload, max. Tier IV Sharnhorst-Class (1909) Faster than her predecessors, the Sharnhorst-class Armored Cruiser should feel better to play. Secondary should have around 3km range. No less than 9 second reload on the 150mm guns, probably closer to 12. The 88s should probably have a 5 or 6 second reload, max. Tier V SMS Blücher SMS Blücher was the last armored cruiser built, and she is significantly more heavily armed than her predecessors. Secondaries should be on par with battleships of the same tier, in terms of rate of fire and accuracy. In terms of range, maybe around 4km. She was the last of what is referred to as ‘armed cruisers’ that German produced. The Große Kreuzer (large cruisers), produced after her were what we know call battlecruisers. Tier VI Deutschland Class Designed as a commerce raider, the Deutschlands where not bound by the Washington or London Naval Treaties and could be considered the first class of Cruiser Killers, ships designed to be able to easily take on and kill Treaty Cruisers. However, unlike the other Cruiser Killers, her armor was not proof against 8 inch shells. This inability was demonstrated during the Battle of the River Plate, where Admiral Graf Spee engaged the Heavy Cruiser HMS Exeter and the Light Cruisers HMS Ajax and HMS Achilles. While the armor proved to be proof against the 6 inch guns of Ajax and Achilles, Exeter managed to score a hit (iirc, while without the fire directors and aimed only have the gun captain, who sitting on the roof of the turret, shouting instructions down through a hatch) above the armor belt and penetrate deep enough to take out Graf Spee’s diesel purification plant, which would eventually lead to the scuttling of the ship, as Graf Spee only had 16 hours of full left in her tanks, not enough to make it to a friendly base for repairs. HMS Exeter received multiple hits, each one doing severe damage, and even near misses were enough to cause damage, the crew of one of her torpedo launchers were all killed by splinters from a near miss and the launcher itself was put out of commission. The final turret about Exeter was disabled when a near miss splashed water onto the exposed electrical inside the turret. Later during the battle, a single hit from one of Graf Spee’s 11 inch guns took out 2 of Ajax's turrets, one from a direct hit, the other was jammed. That tangent aside, Hull (A) represents the Deutschlands as they were initially built, where as Hull (B) represents the Admiral Scheer in her 1940 configuration, which, in my opinion, had the best anti-air configuration. Tier VII D-Class Cruiser Design 3b aka Ersatz Elsass Class Incorporating the lessons learned with the Deutschland Class, the D-Class was the next evolutionary step for the Panzerschiffe. Two ships were contracted to be built, the Ersatz Elsass and Ersatz Hessen. Only one was laid down, and even that one was discontinued after 5 months, being replaced by the Sharnhorst, itself an evolution of an expanded D-Class with a third turret fitted. The D-Class is an overall improvement of the Deutschland, being bigger, faster, better armed, and better protected. While it was planned to have the same two triple turrets as her predecessor, quadruple turrets were also discussed. As for her design, she would be closer to the Cruiser Killers of other nations, designed for long distance travel and commerce raiding, this class was canceled due to the construction of the Dunkerque Battleships, which, themselves, were built in response to the Deutschlands. Tier VIII P-Class Cruiser aka Ersatz Prinzregent Luitpold (named after BB that scuttled at Scapa Flow) Designed as part of Plan Z as a class of 12 panzerschiffes. Hans Zenker was the one who proposed the commerce raiding tactics, which is what the panzerschiffes were designed for. When his bitter rival, Erich Raeder, took over the Kreigsmarine, he opposed the commerce raiding tactics, seemingly only because it was favored by Zenker. The P-Class was a concession to those still in the Kriegsmarine who supported the raider tactics. In the end, the P-Class was canceled in favor of the O-Class Battlecruisers, which were favored by Raeder. I do not believe that the quad 11-inch turret was considered for P-Class, if it was, I haven’t found it in my research. It is included here to help keep P-Class’ DPM up at least to that of the D-Class, if not higher. Tier IX D-Class Cruiser Neuentwurf II aka Ersatz Von der Tann A redesigned D-Class Cruiser that had an extra turret added, this ship would be similar to the Azuma (Project B-65), Alaska, and Stalingrad (and possibly Henri IV). It was a design actually considered. I’ve got a book coming that has more information on the D-Class (and I think the P-Class), so I will be able to revise the list from there. The name for the ship is in memory of the Von der Tann, his unique battlecruiser that was scuttled at Scapa Flow. This, I feel is appropriate because he pressed for the Panzerschiffe for commerce raiding and Erich Raeder, the man who replaced him as Head of Naval Command, hated him so much, he had the D-Class stopped and made it so that no ship could carry the name Von der Tann. It was because of Zenker’s influences on the Navy he had severed with that there was a push for there to be new Panzerschiffe, hence the Cruiser-P. The D-Class Neuentwurf II started to blur the line of the between Panzerschiffe and Battlecruiser. While I have dubbed this class the Ersatz Von der Tann, it would actually have been named Ersatz Elsass during construction and would have likely been named the Elsass Class, though since that is being used for another design of the D-Class. Tier X O-Class Battlecruiser (Matchmaker sees a Cruiser) aka Ersatz Kronprinz Wilhelm The O-Class Battlecruiser was an enlarged derivative of the P-Class. The O-Class came about because Raeder preferred Battlecruisers over Panzerschiffes, and with the design of the O-Class, the P-Class was canceled completely. While this is a Battlecruiser, it is not the first Battlecruiser to appear as a Cruiser in the game (Stalingrad, Kronshtadt), and is included here because of her poor armor, and she was designed with 15-inch guns, not the 11-inch depicted here, I am unsure if I’m ok with 15-inch guns on a cruiser. Old Ideas: Ship Stats are located in the spoilers. I welcome comments, concerns, and criticisms. I know that there is little chance of WG actually using this, and chances are low that we will get a Panzerschiffe line, but I think it would be an interesting conversation. information is largely gained second-hand from Battleships and Battle Cruisers 1905-1970. I've ordered my own copy, and it will be here by the 8th. If there are any inconsistencies, I will correct them as I find them.

Out of curiosity, has anyone actually run Inertial Fuzes for High Explosives (IFHE) on 203mm guns, and is there any noticeable benefit to doing so? I'm asking because 0.8.2 is around the corner, and I'm considering specializing one of my Exeter captains toward brawling. You see, I play hyperaggressively with Exeter and often end matches with 15+ Secondary Battery Hit ribbons for ~400 damage. Most of the damage I deal with secondaries is against BB superstructures, and IFHE would open up penetration of 102mm secondaries to a much wider surface area on several ships from Tiers 4 through 7, BBs and CLs alike. My current captain focuses heavily on tracking enemy DDs and predicting torpedo attacks: While the extra heal from Superintendent is nice, I find that I rarely (if ever) have cause to use it (I run Damage Control Party II, Repair Party II, and Hydroacoustic Search II), and my aggressive play style means Radio Location is generally pointed straight at the nearest visible enemy - not exactly the most useful. At best, RPF is helpful late-game when hunting for the last DD or CV hiding out on the fringes of the map. Which brings me back to the question: does the 42mm penetration matter at all, or should I get AFT instead with this build: Note: The extra flak from AFT is of little importance to me because I still think flak relies too heavily on OpFor CVs' misplays to deal damage. I'm also considering keeping RPF, but again, it feels like it's not super relevant the way I play Exeter. (I'd never consider taking it off of more "conservative" cruisers like Furutaka or Aoba, though.)

Exeter, I'm taking back everything negative about you that I've said with one exception: your 8.4-second rudder shift is still horrendous. Note: I accidentally used my 10-point Bert Dunkirk with DCF, LS, BFT, and CE rather than my 19-point Jack Dunkirk. Oops. 20190331_212705_PBSC505-Exeter_04_Archipelago.wowsreplay

I spotted the Alaska today, skippered by none other than LittleWhiteMouse. Could it be that LWM was testing the final configuration in preparation of her review of the soon to be released but ever elusive Alaska?

[WIP] German Cruiser (Panzerschiffe) Arc GANZ GEHEIM! First and foremost, a special thank-you to @Fr05ty for all his assistance to give this shipwreck of a thread more credibility! The following arc would best fit into the German tech tree as a branch off of the current heavy cruiser line. Indeed, these "panzerschiffe" are somewhere between cruisers and battlecruisers, and therefore are a bit difficult to classify. I chose to treat them as very large cruisers, like the Graf Spee and USS Alaska are. They would offer an entirely unique playstyle, boasting high speeds, decent maneuverability, and guns that make regular cruisers think twice before engaging. They lack significant armour (typical cruiser armour), and therefore they would likely be more "opportunistic" hunters than brawlers. Most likely, a quick strike and then an even quicker retreat would be favourable. The guns mounted aboard these ships would have an admirable reload, and the shells would have a high velocity. Also note that, while these ships were mostly paper designs (Plan Z), the likelihood of their existence, had war not broken out in 1939, would have been very high. In most cases, the ships were either started and not finished or the designs were contracted out and then cancelled due to a change in priorities. Before I jump into the ships, I first want to address the current stats of existing in-game "super-heavy" cruisers that are most similar to the ships I am proposing. Ship HP VI Graf Spee 39,400 IX Alaska 60,800 IX Kronshtadt 71,050 X Stalingrad 72,450 X Azuma (B65) 71,800 *Note: While many may consider Scharnhorst and Gneisenau to be battlecruisers, they do not fit into the data sets of the ships in the above table. WG treats them as fast battleships, and so that is how the numbers play out. I would like to see at least one heal on these ships, as well as the traditional German hydroacoustic search. I am welcome to suggestions!!! Ships yet to be classified: Panzerschiff D Design 3b, Ersatz Elsass (19,000 tons), 2x3 or 2x4 283 mm guns L21 alpha L20e alpha L27, L28 Tier 6: Lutzow (Likely not to be included in this tree, as the current Graf Spee is too close to the cruiser-style gameplay. The D-class would provide the better battlecruiser experience) Main armament: 2x3 283 mm guns Reload time: 20 s 180 degree turn time: 25 s Initial shell velocity: 910 m/s AP shell maximum damage: 8,400 HE shell maximum damage: 3,200 HE shell fire chance: 20% 2x4 torpedo launchers Secondary armament: 8x1 150 mm guns 3x2 105 mm dual-purpose guns HP: 38,900 Armour: Main belt: 80 mm Deck: 45 mm (substantial) Superstructure: Main battery face: 360 mm Maneuverability: 29 knots Tier 6 alternative: Prinz Heinrich (P-class) Main armament: 2x3 283 mm guns Reload time: 16 s 180 degree turn time: 25 s Initial shell velocity: 910 m/s AP shell maximum damage: 8,400 HE shell maximum damage: 3,200 HE shell fire chance: 20% 2x3 torpedo launchers Secondary armament: 2x2 150 mm guns (mounted centerline) 4x2 105 mm dual-purpose guns Armour: Main belt: 120 mm Deck: 20 mm Superstructure: Main battery face: 360 mm HP: 49,300 Maneuverability: 33 knots Tier 7: Ersatz Elsass (D-class) Main armament: 2x4 283 mm guns Reload time: 18 s 180 degree turn time: 25 s Initial shell velocity: 910 m/s AP shell maximum damage: 8,400 HE shell maximum damage: 3,200 HE shell fire chance: 20% 2x3 torpedo launchers Secondary armament: 4x2 150 mm guns (mounted at each corner of the superstructure) 4x2 105 mm dual-purpose guns Armour: Main belt: 220 mm Deck: 35 mm Superstructure: Main battery face: 360 mm HP: 45,400 Maneuverability: 30 knots Tier 8: Admiral Zenker (1928 Design) Main armament: 4x2 305mm guns Reload time: 22 s 180 degree turn time: 30 s Initial shell velocity: 860 m/s AP shell maximum damage: 9,100 HE shell maximum damage: 4,000 HE shell fire chance: 20% 2x3 torpedo launchers Secondary armament: 3x3 150mm guns (think tier V Konigsberg's turrets) Armour: Main belt: Deck: Superstructure: Main battery: HP: 51,300 Maneuverability: 34 knots Tier 9 PREMIUM: Siegfried (O-class) Main armament: 3x2 380 mm guns Reload time: 24 s 180 degree turn time: 36 s Initial shell velocity: 840 m/s AP shell maximum damage: 11,600 HE shell maximum damage: 4,400 HE shell fire chance: 34% 2x3 torpedo launchers Secondary armament: 3x2 150 mm guns 4x2 105 mm dual-purpose guns Armour: Main belt: Deck: Superstructure: Main battery: HP: 64,200 Maneuverability: 35 knots Tier 10: (UNKNOWN) Main armament: 4x3 305 mm guns Reload time: 25 s 180 degree turn time: 25 s Initial shell velocity: 910 m/s AP shell maximum damage: 8,400 HE shell maximum damage: 3,200 HE shell fire chance: 20% 2x3 torpedo launchers Secondary armament: 5x2 150 mm guns 8x2 105 mm dual-purpose guns Armour: Main belt: 225 mm Deck: 20 mm Superstructure: 16 mm Main battery face: 360 mm HP: 70,000 Maneuverability: 35 knots Tier 10 PREMIUM: (Panzerschiffe D Neuentwurf II) Main armament: 3x3 283 mm guns Reload time: 16 s 180 degree turn time: 25 s Initial shell velocity: 910 m/s AP shell maximum damage: 8,400 HE shell maximum damage: 3,200 HE shell fire chance: 20% 2x3 torpedo launchers Secondary armament: 4x2 150 mm guns 7x2 105 mm dual-purpose guns Armour: Main belt: 225 mm Deck: 20 mm Superstructure: 16 mm Main battery face: 360 mm HP: 70,000 Maneuverability: 35 knots Other designs to be considered: Ship/Design ID Displacement Main Battery Maximum Armour thickness ~1933~ D-33/I D-33/II D-33/IIIa D-33/IIIb D-33/IIIc D-33/IV ~1934~ D-34/I D-34/II (later D-35) (Neuentwurf I) D-34/III (Neuentwurf II) ~1935~ D-35/I D-35/II D-35/III D-35/IV D-35/V (later D-35/VI) (would later become Scharnhorst-class) Older version of Design D and E (Gneisenau and Scharnhorst) 30,400 9x283 mm/3x2 330 mm/3x2 350 mm Panzerschiff F (Bismarck)/G (Tirpitz) original designs 35,000??? 4x2 350 mm To be continued... [WIP] The problem with battlecruisers is that they are really hard to classify using the current "battleship or cruiser" division. USS Alaska, for example, is basically a battlecruiser. It does not fit the battleship formula for HP, nor does it fit the cruiser formula. It's kinda in-between. Using the battleship formula, it should have 51,300 HP. Using the cruiser formula, it should have 73,700 HP. The in-game ship has 60,800 HP (almost EXACTLY halfway). Graf Spee, on the other hand, fits the cruiser formula very closely, with roughly a 6.75% buff.

Introduction: As of right now, neither the County nor the York-class Heavy Cruisers of the Royal Navy are represented in World of Warships, and I believe it is a missed opportunity, especially the York class. Due to the similarity of the name HMS York to KMS Yorck, I am suggesting her sister, HMS Exeter, instead. The Yorks are very similar to the Japanese Aoba class, so the majority of this suggestion post will be comparing the two ships. Basic Specifications: Hull HP: ~33,000 Top Speed: 32 kt. Turning Radius: ~690 m Rudder Shift: ~6.5 s Concealment (Sea): ~11.8 km You'll notice that Exeter is very similar to Aoba when it comes to her hull. Being slightly slower and shorter, her overall turning radius would be somewhat smaller than Aoba's, and she would be ever so slightly more difficult to detect. Despite being shorter, Exeter is wider than Aoba and therefore has a greater displacement, leading to a slightly greater health pool. Armament: Main Armament: 3×2 203mm L/50 Mk. VIII Secondary Armament: 4×1 102mm L/45 Mk. V Anti-Aircraft: 2×1 40mm Vickers 2-pdr. Mk. VIII Torpedoes: 2×3 533mm Mk. X Here's where we start seeing some differences between Exeter and Aoba. Exeter's 203 mm main guns will share the Royal Navy CLs' shorter fuzes and improved ricochet angles. They will also lack HE, meaning they won't be able to rely on fire starting to deal damage. As with the RN CLs, her secondary guns will fire HE, though Exeter isn't exactly a brawling cruiser. Her triple 533 mm torpedoes will follow the usual Royal Navy formula with the ability to single-fire her torpedoes. These are the same torpedoes found on the Tier 7 Polish destroyer, the ORP Błyskawica. Unfortunately, the 8 km range of her torpedoes means that even with Concealment Expert, Exeter lacks the ability to stealth torp, meaning they're more of a last ditch weapon than an effective offensive tool. Exeter's most evident weakness is her weak anti-aircraft suite, consisting of her dual-purpose secondaries and a pair of 40 mm Pom-Poms. She will find herself hard-pressed to repel any number of aircraft. Of course, this can be somewhat countered with tactical use of the Catapult Fighter consumable. Which brings me to... Consumables: 1. Damage Control Party 2. Repair Party 3. Hydroacoustic Search 4. Spotting Aircraft or Catapult Fighter As a CA and not a CL, Exeter lacks a consumable her tech tree compatriot, Leander, has: Smoke Generator. However, her lack of defensive consumable is offset by her increased health pool (and thereby improved Repair Party) and heavier armoring. She also lacks the option to equip Defensive Anti-Aircraft Fire, but again, she has access to Repair Party. Conclusion: All in all, I expect Exeter to play very similarly to Aoba by virtue of how similar the ships are. If her targeting is on point against broadside targets, she should perform well as an anti-ship combatant and anti-destroyer screen. As for her anti-aircraft, well, she'd better hug an American cruiser if a carrier decides to play. The goal is to bring a new play style to the Royal Navy while still being familiar to players, and I think it would be cool to see the Royal Navy's final class of heavy cruiser brought to life in the game. I might also have an ulterior motive as an IJN CA and RN CL main...

Instead of the make believe Buffalo , you need to bring in this little beast. She was a one of a kinda Heavy Cruiser cruiser that survived WWII with 13 battle stars and was a serious brawler. Or make it a purchasable tier 8 or 9. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Wichita_(CA-45)

First time I start a topic, so please be gentle. Opinions welcome and encouraged. First of all, I am a Zao enthusiast. And this will be a Cruiser Vs. Cruiser centered article. Second, I have lived the stealth fire era, which was kind of this ships does whatever the crap it likes to(mostly staying far away HE spamming). Third, I have lived Zao's demise as its distinguishing characteristic was removed from game making the ship somewhat unbalanced as the other ships of its class did not see their treats affected. Now to current times, the torpedo choice is more than welcome however this is a Heavy Cruiser and not a Torpedo Boat(also, those weird and absolutely random firing arcs. Take Admiral Graf Spee as an example, also has stern mounted launchers yet has great firing arcs.). So even as being an upgrade as it is it does not give it an edge, in particular as they do not fire rearwards and that would be a chasing deterrent tool. So lets compare the roles of ships of the class by their damage output: Alpha Strike AP Shells Henri IV: 9Bx6200HP=55800HP(3rd) Zao: 12Bx5400HP=64800HP(2nd) Des Moines: 9Bx5000HP=45000HP(5th) Worcester: 12Bx3200HP=38400HP(6th) Hindenburg: 12Bx5900HP=70800HP(1st) Moskva: 9Bx5800HP=52200HP(4th) Minotaur: 10Bx3200HP=32000HP(7th) Damage Per Minute AP Shells Henri IV: 9Bx6200HP=55800HPx4.9=273420HP(7th) Zao: 12Bx5400HP=64800HPx4.4=285120HP(6th) Des Moines: 9Bx5000HP=45000HPx10.9=490500HP(3rd) Worcester: 12Bx3200HP=38400HPx13=499200HP(2nd) Hindenburg: 12Bx5900HP=70800HPx5.5=389400HP(4th) Moskva: 9Bx5800HP=52200HPx5.8=302760HP(5th) Minotaur: 10Bx3200HP=32000HPx18.75=600000HP(1st) Alpha Strike HE Shells Henri IV: 9Bx3400HP=30600HP(2nd) Zao: 12Bx3400HP=40800HP(1st) Des Moines: 9Bx2800HP=25200HP(6th) Worcester: 12Bx2200HP=26400HP(5th) Hindenburg: 12Bx2500HP=30000HP(3rd) Moskva: 9Bx3100HP=27900HP(4th) Damage Per Minute HE Shells Henri IV: 9Bx3400HP=30600HPx4.9=149940HP(6th) Zao: 12Bx3400HP=40800HPx4.4=179520HP(3rd) Des Moines: 9Bx2800HP=25200HPx10.9=274680HP(2nd) Worcester: 12Bx2200HP=26400HPx13=343200HP(1st) Hindenburg: 12Bx2500HP=30000HPx5.5=165000HP(4th) Moskva: 9Bx3100HP=27900HPx5.8=161820HP(5th) As you can observe Zao comes out champion only in HE Alpha Strike(Certainly not the greatest asset.). There is also a clear role distinction between DPM and Alpha Strike ships, Zao being part of the latter. Now in the wiki the ship is described as the ninja that gives a killer blow and vanishes like a gasp of wind a thing that seldom happens in practice. It also lacks both smoke screen and/or radar(a thing that should see some sort of countermeasure soon). It does have however good odds of landing several shells at range(As it has the better dispersion and among the fastest shells) even to faster moving ships. But the game at range is a very different one. When you get close to another cruiser or happen to meet one up close you either expect the captain in charge sucks or to meet Davy Jones pronto. As you have seen with the previous data and your personal knowledge of the game due to being playin tier 10 the ships has no tools at all to deal with another cruiser at close range(lower fire rate, lower HP pool, no BB class armor, no good torpedo arcs). So to start closing this wall of text, the point here is to propose a small change to Zao as to give it a few more odds of coming out victorious of a close encounter with another cruiser and I have personally considered two options, also these being one or the other. 1st: Since WG decide to tweak the torpedo armament, that option works in a somewhat different fashion. If the ship sports Type 93 torpedoes they should have the classic rear firing arc of IJN heavy cruisers and if the ship sports the shorter range torpedoes to give it a more brawling capable arc(yes a forwardish firing arc and no F3s as they would be damn OP) with a longer reload time than current. 2nd: To create its own unique consumable in the like of a Banzai charge for let's say 30 seconds in which the ship goes sort of berserker with a faster reload rate and improved maneuverability and somewhat more damage tolerant, this with a long cooldown and little charges so as to not promote abuse of it(like, see that dude around the island, he's done). Anyhow, this is not a "Zao sucks" post. I do like the ship, yet I see that the changes in the game have left it victim of power creep. For those who took the time to read though, thank you for your time and fair seas.