XXRed_DawnXX

New Premium Ships Ideas

  • You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.

Premium Ship Ideas   114 members have voted

  1. 1. What Ship(s) should be added in the game as Premium(s)?

    • USS Laffey (DD-724)
    • USS Samuel B. Roberts (DE-413)
    • USS Alaska (CB-1)
    • USS California (BB-44)
    • USS Nevada (BB-36)
    • IJN Yahagi (CR)
    • IJN Ise (BB)
    • IJN Tosa (planned BB)
    • SMS Derfflinger (CR)
    • (NEW) SMS Schleswig-Holstein (BB)
    • (NEW) Ersatz Yorck-class (planned CR)
    • Other (please respond in comments)

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

120 posts in this topic

Posted (edited) · Report post

I'm glad that Wargaming finally added the British cruiser HMS Hood, the Japanese carrier IJN Kaga as premiums with the USS Enterprise (CV-6) on its way (they were featured in official posts about new premium additions that are soon to be added into the game), yet, there are more ships that should be added into the game. If not part of an extension to a tech-tree, at least a premium.

 

Assuming that Wargaming will add British CV/DD tech trees, a Russian BB tech tree, French BB/DD tech trees, Italian BB/CR/DD tech trees, a German planned carrier tree, and a Japanese carrier tree extension that will all hopefully be added to the game soon. What ship(s) do you think they should add into the game. If it's not in the poll, feel free to respond in the comments.

Edited by XXRed_DawnXX

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

USS Samuel B. Roberts (DE-413)

USS Olympia (C-6)

 

I would love to BOTH of these ships added to the game as Premium.


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russian BBs won't be added in a long time.

 

Also, some of them are planned as tech trees, such as Ise, California, and Nevada.

 

What's a CR?


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My interest has waned because of nerfs to Premiums and the less enjoyable meta following 0.6.3. Up to Okhotnik, I had every Premium ship offered, but my wallet is closed.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My interest has waned because of nerfs to Premiums and the less enjoyable meta following 0.6.3. Up to Okhotnik, I had every Premium ship offered, but my wallet is closed.

 

How were premiums nerfed?  If anything, premiums have seemingly been buffed since they were dominating last year's ranked - a big problem for a lot of people.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I pretty much agree with the more premium, the better - for the "Other" category:

 

USS WICHITA (CA-45) - Take the Cleveland and put the New Orleans 8" guns on it.  Would probably be at least a little better than the Indianapolis (most anything would be).

 

LEXINGTON CLASS Battle Cruiser of 1919 - the carrier was converted from this hull.  Would be nice to have a US CB with 16" guns.

 

USS WORCHESTER (CL-144):  Although it would most likely be the tier X CL if the line ever splits - would still like it to be in game if the split does not happen.  6" auto guns that are not British, SWEET!  Judging by a recent TAP post, this is going to happen.  My next would have been BROOKLYN (CL-40) but this is most likely going to be included in the CL/CA split also.

 

HMS VANGUARD: Not likely to be in the British BB line as it is a single ship class, perhaps a bit undergunned with old 15" guns from Courageous and Glorius.  Possibly a tier VII?  Last battleship to be launched in the world.


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

USS Alaska

 

The Alaskas were the closest things America ever built to a battlecruiser. They were constructed like cruisers, but strongly resembled smaller versions of Iowa-class battleships. They were armed with 12" guns of a new design that actually fired a heavier warhead at longer ranges than the old Wyoming-class battleships, at a rate of 2.4 to 3 per minute.

 

In game terms, the Alaska would fill a niche very similar to the Scharnhorst. However, its guns would be a bit more powerful in exchange for weaker armor. From a technical perspective, the Alaska's guns have roughly equivalent citadel penetration capability than the New Mexico's, but only do around 3/4 as much damage. Its armor is also significantly less than a New Mexico's. This would place it roughly in the tier 6 premium battleship category, and they would be played similarly to a North Carolina, where you would have to angle your ship to avoid being citadeled.

 

I considered whether the Alaska should be tier 7 or higher, but realized its armor and armament combination would not allow it to compete at higher tiers. It is very much to tier 6 what the Scharnhorst is to tier 7.


3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

What's a CR?

BB means battleship

CV means carrier

DD means destroyer

DE means destroyer escort

CR means cruiser (or at least that what I think)

Edited by XXRed_DawnXX

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tillman class battleships

Scharnhorst and Gnieusenau (the WW1 versions)

The Powerful class cruiser

The Novgorod


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BB means battleship

CV means carrier

DD means destroyer

DE means destroyer escort

CR means cruiser (or at least that what I think)

 

CR is not a designation. Cruisers were either CL for light cruiser, CA for heavy cruiser, and CB for very heavy cruisers, in the case of Alaska, or battlecruisers in the case of everyone else.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The USS Johnston and the USS Samuel B Roberts, the stars of the Battle of Leyte Gulf. Also the USS Wichita and the USS Houston. The Admiral Scheer as a tech tree ship. The USS Yorktown CV-5 as a techtree ship also the USS Hornet CV-8 and maybe USS Wasp. Then there is the IJN Shinano and the Ise class battleship carrier hybrid. Maybe the KMS Seydlitz both as a Hipper class cruiser and the planned Auxiliary Carrier. Battleship Roma. To end it I would like to see more ships from the Great White Fleet because I love the color scheme.


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

CR is not a designation. Cruisers were either CL for light cruiser, CA for heavy cruiser, and CB for very heavy cruisers, in the case of Alaska, or battlecruisers in the case of everyone else.

 

The designations of US warships is, at times, very complicated.  The main combat groups were B for Battleships, C for Cruisers, D for Destroyers, and S for Submarines.  The double group letter was the primary vessels:  BB, DD, SS, but Cruisers were different.

 

There were unofficial Cruiser categories: ACR for Armoured Cruiser, PC for Protected Cruisers, and C for Cruisers prior to 1920.  When the Designation System was invented in 1920 the ACRs became CA (Cruiser, Armoured (1921-1931) and later Heavy Cruiser), Light Cruisers became CL (Omaha class), Scout Cruisers became CS (Chester class),  Battlecruisers were CC, the later Alaska class were Large Cruisers - CB and not CC. Since the two of the first 3 Aircraft Carrier were converted CC (Lexington class) they got Cruiser, Aviation - CV, but they were never referred to as anything except Aircraft Carriers.  The CVs weren't split off into their own group until much later.  The Bogue was an Escort Aircraft Carrier - CVE, the Independence a Light Aircraft Carrier - CVL and the Midway was a Large Aircraft Carrier - CVB (1940s to 1952). While the Atlanta/Oakland/Juneau class were Anti-Aircraft Light Cruisers the surviving vessels did not get the CLAA designation until after WWII.

 

The entire system is rather lengthy, at times strange, and this is not the venue for the whole thing.

 

Hope this helps.

Edited by Schroughphie

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note that, regarding the Alaska, I put a lot of work into figuring out which would be the proper tier. The guns were a little better than Scharnhorst, whereas the armor is substantially worse. It would very much fulfill a battlecruiser type role at tier 6, being fast and maneuverable but if a New Mexico or higher catches it in broadside, it's toast. It would also have a very high AA rating, possibly, as a unique ability for a "battleship" type, having defensive AA fire.

Edited by Warden_Wolf

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've noticed a lot of comments regarding my designation of cruisers as "CR", I know the designations (CL = light cruiser, CA = heavy cruiser, and CB = large cruiser, etc.), but it doesn't change the fact that they'll all be marked as just cruisers in the game. Lets just focus on what ship(s) you want to see in the game.

Edited by XXRed_DawnXX

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CR = Can't Remember

as in CRS =Can't Remember Shyt

LR5ocui.gif

 

Hey Clutch Cargo! How's Mr. Snowshoe?

 https://i.ytimg.com/vi/FN0vMgE0t3o/hqdefault.jpg


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hey Clutch Cargo! How's Mr. Snowshoe?

 https://i.ytimg.com/vi/FN0vMgE0t3o/hqdefault.jpg

 

 

Hey Clutch Cargo! How's Mr. Snowshoe?

 https://i.ytimg.com/vi/FN0vMgE0t3o/hqdefault.jpg

Mr. Snowshoe is Still around .

gKhU2np.jpg    as well as Swampy   CqSHw6S.jpg

LR5ocui.gif     YKYLVzf.gif


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

CR is not a designation. Cruisers were either CL for light cruiser, CA for heavy cruiser, and CB for very heavy cruisers, in the case of Alaska, or battlecruisers in the case of everyone else.

 

Just me asking a question Hop

I had thought the designation for battlecruiser was BC and not CB?

do you know which is actually correct?


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note that, regarding the Alaska, I put a lot of work into figuring out which would be the proper tier. The guns were a little better than Scharnhorst, whereas the armor is substantially worse. It would very much fulfill a battlecruiser type role at tier 6, being fast and maneuverable but if a New Mexico or higher catches it in broadside, it's toast. It would also have a very high AA rating, possibly, as a unique ability for a "battleship" type, having defensive AA fire.

 

IMHO, Alaska would stomp holes in the competition at tier 6, because she enjoyed the benefits of autoloaders on her main batteries, not to mention radar driven accuracy and mondo maneuverability.

putting her ANYWHERE lower than tier 8 (and probably tier 9 as a companion to Missouri) would be little more than blatant pay-to-win seal-clubbing.

the damn ship's just too freakin good!


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just me asking a question Hop

I had thought the designation for battlecruiser was BC and not CB?

do you know which is actually correct?

 

 

it's BC (duh!).

 Also, not everyone uses American abbreviations, like AC (or ACC) is just as good as using CV.

The British Navy abbreviations are/were more widespread - they even had signal flag designations for various classes of ship.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want them to add the HNLMS De Ruyter as a t4 premium when and if they add a pan European tree.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.