Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
UltimateNewbie

Commonwealth Faction - Cruisers and Next Steps

8 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,005
[FML]
Members
4,323 posts
16,699 battles

So, I was surprised that with the release of the Perth, WG decided to create a new faction (The Commonwealth) rather than just have it as a branch of the UK faction.  This obviously has downsides for Captain training and so on.  But it does raise the question: Will non-premium ships ever be added to this new faction?  If so, what would they be?

 

Whilst there are quite a few countries that form the Commonwealth, not many had material navies during the Second World War; only Australia, Canada, and New Zealand (happy to be corrected).

 

There are a range of 'famous' ships from these countries, such as the light cruiser HMNZS Achilles which fought at the Battle of the River Plate, HMAS Sydney that was destroyed off the Western Australian coast by a materially less capable Dutch auxillary cruisers, HMCS Haida which fought in battles that destroyed 15 enemy ships, or HMAS Melbourne which was Australia's last aircraft carrier.  I imagine that some, or all, of these will become Premium ships mainly for their quirkiness (though given that HMAS Perth was of a similar class to Achilles and Sydney and already exists, these might be an exception).  

 

The other issue is that, for the most part, Commonwealth countries operated UK ships - sometimes with local modifications, sometimes just purchasing directly off UK production runs.  So, there isnt any material gameplay reason to have them separate as a faction.  

 

The exception is whether you engage in some totally made up speculation about the type of ships these countries would want to build.  

 

I can think immediately of two types:

  • Canada, wanting ships with strong ASW capability given the sea lines of communication between North America and the UK that was patrolled by German U-Boats.  However, given Submarines will never be a thing in WoWS, this design philosophy appears pointless.
  • Australia, which was at the edge of supply lines to its key allies in the UK (and armies fighting in North Africa) as well as the US (with armies fighting in south-east Asia).  This could be a more interesting framework.
  • OTOH, New Zealand would have continued to do whatever London wanted them to do; ie nothing particularly imaginative other than providing ships and/or crews here and there.

 

The 'Australian framework', for want of a better term, implies a Commonwealth tech tree line of convoy protection type ships - ie, destroyers and light cruisers similar to the UK light cruiser line (of which, HMAS Perth would be a premium).  But it is not a huge leap of imagination that, if ties of empire and money weren't such a problem, Australia might have wanted to build types of ship that could effectively attack Japan's supply lines that were established as part of the 'Co-Prosperity Sphere'.  This is not totally off the cards, as Australia did run some UK-built heavy cruisers (HMA Ships Canberra, Australia and Shropshire) of the 8-inch County Class.  Turns out that during the First World War, the RAN even had a battlecruiser in the form of HMAS Australia.

 

Commerce raiders, in the popular imagination of today, were really only built by Germany (eg, Graf Spee).  But perhaps a heavy cruiser concept could be viable for the Commonwealth faction.  Noting that, other than the County class ships, pretty much any design in a heavy cruiser line would be a paper ship, such ships would want to have: 

  • Spotter aircraft, to detect enemy commerce ships at range; 
  • Endurance for long missions far from friendly ports; 
  • Armour sufficient to protect key spaces against 6 inch guns - the maximum expected by convoy escorts; 
  • Guns sufficient to destroy convoy escorts (initially 8 inch, later 10 inch); and
  • Secondaries (max 6 inch, prolly 5 inch) and/or torpedoes to finish off abandoned commerce ships.

 

In game terms, these ships would be akin to the soon-to-be-released Graf Spee premium ship and similar German heavy cruisers, but could have their own UK-inspired quirks (eg smoke or radar).  They would be competitive with, but play differently to, Japanese Myoko class and similar cruisers.  

 

So, questions for GD are: how do you see the Commonwealth faction developing in WoWS?  Do you think a heavy cruiser line would be a valuable addition to the game by offering something different?  Or do you want more CLs or DDs instead?

 

Edited by UltimateNewbie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,043 posts
10,248 battles

All of this hinges on whether or not the various Commonwealth nations made the effort to come up with their own designs, from which the developers could draw for any potential tech tree. Some are going to be "tweaked" versions of British-built and -developed vessels, while there may have been more than a few design studies unique to each member nation. I wouldn't be surprised to see the standard three lines of battleship, cruiser and destroyer, but with a mix of national origins. HMAS Australia would probably be a Tier IV or V simply based on the era, while HMCS Haida might be a Tier VII or VIII tech tree ship rather than the premium everyone expects.

 

The same could come of the Pan-Asian "tree," as well as any other "confederation"-type branch that WG might develop in future, like South America, to represent their naval arms race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,513
Members
16,315 posts
12,285 battles

The more the better, including diversity. I doubt we will see paper ships though who knows, I think more than enough ships actually existed to have at the least a short scaled down tech tree. I look forward to sinking Canadian ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
5,281 posts
12,191 battles

One quick correction - Wargaming actually changed it's stance on Submarines. Not so much "never gonna happen" as it is "Thats further down the road" - Believe it was a Q and A a few moths back or some other interview but the gist was "We might do them, don't expect it anytime soon though".

 

Certainly not against it, I despise premium only tech trees (major issue I've had with Warplanes) and it's why I support making full lines even if you have to use duplicates, paper ships, or stretch history a little because other than - "oh hey that ship" theres no point to it. Whats the point of GZ, Perth, any other ship if you can't train other captains with it. Beyond extra credits maybe. Least in Warspite's case it's a matter of whenever they eventually get to UK BB (with likely a ton of tier 4 BB's with 15+ point captains at the release flooding MM). Odds are unless they have some native designs, built or otherwise, It'd likely be akin to the Chinese tank line in Tanks where the majority of it is either Russian (save for a couple early tier US/UK tanks if I recall correctly), or based on Russian tanks. Lots of doubles from the UK cruiser line with native built/paper ships mixed in. Possibly with some tweaks to game play and stats to differentiate it at least a little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HINON]
Members
2,642 posts
7,936 battles

As a faction i imagine it would be a Destroyer/Cruiser tree with various modified Destroyers and Cruisers from the RN tree. though personally wouldn't mind seeing just modified, historically significant ships as premiums: HMAS Australia (D84) one of the ships of the Scrap Iron Flotilla (HMA Ships Stuart, Vampire, Vendetta, Voyager and Waterhen), HMAS Sydney (D48), HMNZS Achilles, HMCS Haida and plenty of other Destroyers and Light/Heavy Cruisers spring to mind that had distinguished wartime careers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
629 posts
2,397 battles

I believe WG wants to eventually do the "minor powers" tech tree (poland, china, etc) and then "commonwealth" tech tree (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, etc)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,889
[HINON]
Members
7,797 posts
2,144 battles

I believe WG wants to eventually do the "minor powers" tech tree (poland, china, etc) and then "commonwealth" tech tree (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, etc)

 

That depends, they might do it regionally, which is what it seems from the Pan-Asia tree. Commonwealth is obviously commonwealth countries. I'd imagine Pan-Asia, though it only has Chinese and Taiwanese DDs as premiums, would carry ships from minor Asian naval powers, like the Thai navy.

Poland has their own tree mostly likely for sales purposes... But I suspect we'll see a Pan-Europe tree for more minor powers such as Sweden, the Netherlands, Spain, Austro-Hungary, Greece, etc... nations that couldn't fallout whole lines by themselves.

There's also South America, which had numerous naval powers during the timeframe of the game. People forget they had their own version of the dreadnought race, and for short periods some of the South American countries held the prestige of having the most powerful warships afloat, even when compared to European dreadnoughts. Of course, they couldn't keep up with the race because of the industry reasons, so they quickly were overtaken, but they held the spot for a period of time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,216 posts
951 battles

I believe WG wants to eventually do the "minor powers" tech tree (poland, china, etc) and then "commonwealth" tech tree (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, etc)

 

This. But if you're banking on it happening any time in the next 24-36 months, I have a bridge in NYC to sell you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×