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

WG should give high priority to British and German battlecruisers

52 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
7,086 posts

P2i2OcY.jpg

 

I know they won't, but the flurry of activity surrounding all things British leaves me convinced that the Royal Navy may actually be the most popular nationality in the game (at least on the NA servers). This can't bear out yet in terms of raw stats, of course, because the ships we've received thus far has been really, really niche (with the exception of Warspite), but the fact that people go absolutely nutso debating the tiers for these boats and their general characteristics seems to be directly tied to their following.

 

As such, I believe it would be a good idea for WG to sideline other trees (including the absurd Russian paper battleship line) and drive forward on British and German battlecruisers. Both lines would be near-complete with real-world vessels (or at least designs) from tier 3-10 - a far cry from the Russian tree, which is arguably going to be utter fiction for at least half the boats. Moreover, I think battlecruisers are just more in line with what's fun in WoWs - namely: high mobility, high firepower, and the ability to serve as pushing units. I know that I'm pretty desperate myself for Renown/Repulse, but I'd similarly really like to get my hands on Lutzow and Mackensen (those mid-tier German battlecruisers were the epitome of sexy). Even Moltke and New Zealand have their charms.

 

Obviously, this will not happen due to catering to their highly jingoistic base... but I wish it would regardless. It sucks to think we might be waiting until 2019 to experience the most battle-tested warships of WWI.

Edited by Battlecruiser_Tiger
  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,113
[CHASE]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,973 posts
13,112 battles

American ships on the NA server are probably far more anticipated than anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
7,086 posts

American ships on the NA server are probably far more anticipated than anything else.

 

Yeah, but there aren't really that many ships left.

 

You could do a destroyer split, of course, and the much-anticipated cruiser split. A second battleship tree is also possible, but it would be absolutely dominated by 21-knot standards (some of which I would really like, such as Nevada and California). However, I'm not convinced that a second American BB tree would really offer anything different in terms of gameplay - just a lot of very, very similar ships to what we already have. By contrast, British battlecruiser (and, to an extent, German BCs) are very different from their BB counterparts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,115
Alpha Tester
2,552 posts

I was pretty disappointed that Derfflinger was not part of the German BB line. No idea what the lower tier British BBs are yet so there's still hope that it may be BCs, but I won't count on it. That's what I like about the JPN BB line, it's a mixture of BCs and BBs. I just feel we have enough slug BBs already, the Colorado being my worst experience. 18 knots in a tier 9 battle, what a nightmare it was! Personally I'm hoping for the Indefatigable and Lion BCs to fill the lower tiers, something different from the same old sluggish tier 3 BBs which we currently have.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,039
Members
34,409 posts
10,768 battles

I'm thinking that BCs are going to be reserved for sale as premiums.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
7,086 posts

I was pretty disappointed that Derfflinger was not part of the German BB line. No idea what the lower tier British BBs are yet so there's still hope that it may be BCs, but I won't count on it. That's what I like about the JPN BB line, it's a mixture of BCs and BBs. I just feel we have enough slug BBs already, the Colorado being my worst experience. 18 knots in a tier 9 battle, what a nightmare it was! Personally I'm hoping for the Indefatigable and Lion BCs to fill the lower tiers, something different from the same old sluggish tier 3 BBs which we currently have.

 

I don't think they're going to want to combine any more trees they eventually plan to split - it strikes me as a lot of unnecessary work. One of the reasons they were able to combine the Japanese trees is that the IJN changed the designation of the Kongos during the rebuilds, so they went from BCs to BBs (in theory... not so much in practice). By contrast, the Brits stuck with the designations that ships started with, even after significant rebuilds (some kind of similar case to Kongo could be made for Repulse following her final reconstruction - my guess is that the Japanese would have reclassified her, too). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IJN]
Members
318 posts
18,680 battles

The thing about Battlecruisers is that only Germany and Britain built enough of them to have a tech tree branch. America, France, Japan, and Russia only contributed two or three designs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
7,086 posts

The thing about Battlecruisers is that only Germany and Britain built enough of them to have a tech tree branch. America, France, Japan, and Russia only contributed two or three designs.

 

Well, yes, that's why I didn't suggest adding an American or Russian or French BC tree :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
398
[SIMP]
Members
1,518 posts
12,921 battles

If it isn't Soviet, it will happen when they are done with soviet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,424 posts
3,448 battles

I was pretty disappointed that Derfflinger was not part of the German BB line. No idea what the lower tier British BBs are yet so there's still hope that it may be BCs, but I won't count on it. That's what I like about the JPN BB line, it's a mixture of BCs and BBs. I just feel we have enough slug BBs already, the Colorado being my worst experience. 18 knots in a tier 9 battle, what a nightmare it was! Personally I'm hoping for the Indefatigable and Lion BCs to fill the lower tiers, something different from the same old sluggish tier 3 BBs which we currently have.

 

What? British battlecruisers like Indefatigable and Lion would be some of the least fun ships to play in the game. Huge targets, with horrific armor values.

 

Not to mention they'd get detonated every third hit. :trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
227
[SPTR]
Members
2,462 posts
3,947 battles

B-b-but muh OP Russian paper botes...

 

Seriously though, I'd love more battlecruisers. Alaska, Invincible, Indefatigable, Lion, Tiger, the planned Lexington class, the German ones I can't name right now...

Edited by SgtSullyC3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
650 posts
1,842 battles

I would kind of rather have separate battlecruiser lines, if they exist, fold back into the respective nations' battleship lines at, say, T8 or so.

 

By that tier the BB's in the game are all "fast battleships," which is what the battlecruiser concept kind of evolved into, and the paper monstrosities that would be needed to fill out battlecruiser lines at tiers 8-10 seem like a balancing nightmare to me. 

 

Something like...

 

RN:

 

T3 - Invincible

T4 - Princess Royal (Lion class but to avoid confusion with the T9 BB)

T5 - Tiger

T6 - Renown

T7 - Admiral (Hood with speculative later-war refit)

 

KM:

 

T3 - Von Der Tann

T4 - Moltke

T5 - Seydlitz

T6 - Derfflinger (with Bayern-style fictional rebuild)

T7 - Mackensen

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
7,086 posts

I would kind of rather have separate battlecruiser lines, if they exist, fold back into the respective nations' battleship lines at, say, T8 or so.

 

By that tier the BB's in the game are all "fast battleships," which is what the battlecruiser concept kind of evolved into, and the paper monstrosities that would be needed to fill out battlecruiser lines at tiers 8-10 seem like a balancing nightmare to me. 

 

Something like...

 

RN:

 

T3 - Invincible

T4 - Princess Royal (Lion class but to avoid confusion with the T9 BB)

T5 - Tiger

T6 - Renown

T7 - Admiral (Hood with speculative later-war refit)

 

KM:

 

T3 - Von Der Tann

T4 - Moltke

T5 - Seydlitz

T6 - Derfflinger (with Bayern-style fictional rebuild)

T7 - Mackensen

 

 

 

 

You can go a lot further with both of those. 

 

British:

 

T8: J3 class

T9: G3 class

T10: Unknown... I favor HMS Incomparable just for sheer silliness.

 

German: 

 

T8: O-class battlecruiser

T9: R-class battlecruiser

T10: Again, something fictional, but if you have an open tier-10 slot, you know WG won't leave it empty.

Edited by Battlecruiser_Tiger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
650 posts
1,842 battles

 

You can go a lot further with both of those. 

 

British:

 

T8: J3 class

T9: G3 class

T10: Unknown... I favor HMS Incomparable just for sheer silliness.

 

German: 

 

T8: O-class battlecruiser

T9: R-class battlecruiser

T10: Again, something fictional, but if you have an open tier-10 slot, you know WG won't leave it empty.

 

I direct the right honorable gentleman (lady?) to my remarks some moments ago:

 

the paper monstrosities that would be needed to fill out battlecruiser lines at tiers 8-10 seem like a balancing nightmare to me. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IJN]
Members
318 posts
18,680 battles

If it isn't Soviet, it will happen when they are done with soviet

 

If your talking about Russian Battleships that entire branch of the tech tree will be mostly paperships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
611
[SYN]
Members
2,861 posts
10,456 battles

 

Yeah, but there aren't really that many ships left.

 

You could do a destroyer split, of course, and the much-anticipated cruiser split. A second battleship tree is also possible, but it would be absolutely dominated by 21-knot standards (some of which I would really like, such as Nevada and California). However, I'm not convinced that a second American BB tree would really offer anything different in terms of gameplay - just a lot of very, very similar ships to what we already have. By contrast, British battlecruiser (and, to an extent, German BCs) are very different from their BB counterparts.

 

A second Tree for american BB's could offer somethign very different at T9 and 10, as the T9 could potentially be South Dakota 1920, and the T10 coult potnetially be the Tillman IV-2, but with 10 18 inch guns instead of the original 15.

 

Otherwise, I would say before adding British and German BC's, the french tree needs to be finished with at least BB's and DD's added, as well as British DD's, British CV's, and Italian ships. Then once those are done add the British and German BC's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
7,086 posts

 

I direct the right honorable gentleman (lady?) to my remarks some moments ago:

 

 

 

 

Not sure how they become a balancing nightmare. J3 was a slightly upsized Hood with 9 x 15". G3's closest equivalent was actually an Iowa (although she had far, faaaar worse guns and lacking AA, though a theoretical mid 30s refit would solve both problems).

 

The only real hangup I see is the O-class battlecruiser - their armor was made of tinfoil. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,115
Alpha Tester
2,552 posts

The thing about Battlecruisers is that only Germany and Britain built enough of them to have a tech tree branch. America, France, Japan, and Russia only contributed two or three designs.

 

Precisely. No doubt the French, Russian and Italian BB lines (if/when they ever come), will be mostly BBs. Would be nice if the RN tree offers something different like BCs, at least for the lower tiers. I'm already dreading Nelson's 23 knot speed if it does see tier 8-10 battles. The current BB lines are a real pain to grind and the fun only begins when you reach NC and Gneisenau. The Japanese grind is more forgiving thanks to fast BBs starting at tier 4 with the Myogi, even though it leads to the slug Fuso.

 

 

What? British battlecruisers like Indefatigable and Lion would be some of the least fun ships to play in the game. Huge targets, with horrific armor values.

 

Not to mention they'd get detonated every third hit. :trollface:

 

Still better than the current tier 3 BBs, often sailing in straight lines and slow to maneuver to avoid incoming torpedoes. They're all the same, sluggish. Oh the sound of multiple torpedo hits, music to my Isokaze.

 

2262120_1324423222411.64res_213_269.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
71
[-SYN-]
Members
218 posts
4,513 battles

Battlecruisers would honestly be a fun addition Hood's been quite a bit of fun (we've had this conversation though as I've run into you playing her lol).

 

It could also be a balancing pinnacle between cruisers and full BBs, especially in lower tiers. Enough firepower to be deadly, but thin enough armor to not be totally broken. I'd imagine reloads would be a touch slower as well, to keep them from replacing cruisers.

 

Could also throw in the Lexington Class Battlecruisers (as first designed) as an American prem.

 

Would really like to see Repulse/Renown, Seydiltz, and the others from Jutland at some point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,644
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
12,147 posts
9,111 battles

Considering how worked up people are getting because wg didn't choose the right name for the tier 10 or used a version they didn't like it's probably better to go back to other lines. There is a second USN CA line, a couple USN BB lines, a USN BC line, a second IJN BB line, a second IJN CV line, a USN Destroyer Leader line, etc. the list goes on of cool unique ships that won't cause fits of autistic rage on the forum. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,301 posts
883 battles

Considering how worked up people are getting because wg didn't choose the right name for the tier 10 or used a version they didn't like it's probably better to go back to other lines. There is a second USN CA line, a couple USN BB lines, a USN BC line, a second IJN BB line, a second IJN CV line, a USN Destroyer Leader line, etc. the list goes on of cool unique ships that won't cause fits of autistic rage on the forum. 

 

Not the right name? The Conquerer was one of the 4 Lions and the only one that wasn't laid down (pretty sure Lion, Temeraire, and Thunderer were all laid down and started construction before being canceled), so it's not inconceivable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,386
[LEGIO]
Members
3,750 posts
11,136 battles

I think only Lion and Temeraire were laid down with another two (Conqueror and Thunderer) planned but construction never actually started on those.

 

So if we were to presume that only the first two Lions were built it is possible (but not certain) that a follow-on class would use the next name planned for the prior class.

Edited by Lampshade_M1A2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
650 posts
1,842 battles

Considering how worked up people are getting because wg didn't choose the right name for the tier 10 or used a version they didn't like it's probably better to go back to other lines. There is a second USN CA line, a couple USN BB lines, a USN BC line, a second IJN BB line, a second IJN CV line, a USN Destroyer Leader line, etc. the list goes on of cool unique ships that won't cause fits of autistic rage on the forum. 

 

Nobody is raging about the name, just mildly disappointed or feeling there were better choices. 

 

Lampshade's point about the latter pair of Lions being reordered as a bigger class in the fictional universe where these ships exist is a plausible explanation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
425
[-ARM-]
Beta Testers
1,033 posts
14,309 battles

B-b-but muh OP Russian paper botes...

 

Seriously though, I'd love more battlecruisers. Alaska, Invincible, Indefatigable, Lion, Tiger, the planned Lexington class, the German ones I can't name right now...

 

For the record, the Alaska-class was designated as a Large Cruiser. While it was basically a battle cruiser in all but name, the navy designers labelled it as a large cruiser so that when they had to pass this by the bean counters in Congress, the idea of authorizing more cruisers would have been a little easier than authorizing more heavy capital ships a-la battleships and battle cruisers.

 

That being said, I believe the following accurately portrays my sentiment if and when the Alaska is released.

 giphy.gif

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
398
[SIMP]
Members
1,518 posts
12,921 battles

 

If your talking about Russian Battleships that entire branch of the tech tree will be mostly paperships.

 

Paperships doesn't matter

 

Only Soviet matters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×