Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
LowSpeed_US

Suggestion

21 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

44
[NSEW]
Members
413 posts
7,896 battles

Hello all,

 

With the changes, and the dare I say the direction this game is headed towards.

Does anyone else think perhaps there is a need for Heavy Cruisers? 

By that I don't mean, cruisers with heavier guns only. But rather a tech tree of cruiser lines that have more tanky characteristics.

 

Discuss...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,708
[HINON]
WoWS Wiki Editor, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
6,498 posts
3,751 battles

Over all, most cruisers were not heavily armored as they were intended for screening fleets, providing AA escort, and hunting down smaller ships. There were few heavily armored cruisers that were built, such as Algérie and the Zara-class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,368
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
4,938 posts
6,440 battles

CcvB6KX.gif

Heavy cruiser means cruisers with 8 inch guns or higher, heavy cruisers aren't measured by armor/tankiness, i *think* you may be talking about battlecruisers, sure they didnt have that much armor, but im sure it was more than your average heavy cruiser was sporting during WW2, though, not many battlecruisers were made in WW2 to my knowledge, but if you are refering to battlecruisers, we have some in game, Hood,Amagi(i think) and i believe even Kongo was classified as a battlecruiser at one point

 

Edited by tcbaker777

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
239
[HC]
[HC]
Beta Testers
1,312 posts
9,404 battles

No Discussion needed, any cruiser with guns larger than 155mm is by definition, a heavy cruiser. Some navies were not big on heavy cruisers (Royal Navy) and some built light cruisers that eventually got as large as a heavy cruiser (Japan with the Mogami class and the US Navy with the Brooklyn class)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44
[NSEW]
Members
413 posts
7,896 battles

I see your all your points above. However, what is the thought behind the ships available right now in Warships? Are they strictly modelled upon past ships or particular era? or are they somewhat  a mix of fictional ships having been inspired by some ships?

 

Forgive me, I'm not a historian nor well versed with the design aspects of the game with ships.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
585
[ARRGG]
Members
4,674 posts
7,503 battles
33 minutes ago, LowSpeed_US said:

Hello all,

 

With the changes, and the dare I say the direction this game is headed towards.

Does anyone else think perhaps there is a need for Heavy Cruisers? 

By that I don't mean, cruisers with heavier guns only. But rather a tech tree of cruiser lines that have more tanky characteristics.

 

Discuss...

 

 

The problem with this is they would make this Cruiser less maneuverable so in effect you'd have a Pewee BB that they would eat for Breakfest .. do great against other Cruisers though and wouldn't they be happy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SYN]
Members
234 posts
3,632 battles
33 minutes ago, HMCS_Devilfish said:

The problem with this is they would make this Cruiser less maneuverable so in effect you'd have a Pewee BB that they would eat for Breakfest .. do great against other Cruisers though and wouldn't they be happy

Like, for example, the Indianapolis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,708
[HINON]
WoWS Wiki Editor, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
6,498 posts
3,751 battles
1 hour ago, tcbaker777 said:

Hood, Amagi(i think) and i believe even Kongo was classified as a battlecruiser at one point

Kongo was originally built as a battlecruiser. She was later reconstructed and up armored to a battleship, then again to a fast battleship.

 

 

1 hour ago, SgtBeltfed said:

No Discussion needed, any cruiser with guns larger than 155mm is by definition, a heavy cruiser. Some navies were not big on heavy cruisers (Royal Navy) and some built light cruisers that eventually got as large as a heavy cruiser (Japan with the Mogami class and the US Navy with the Brooklyn class)

 

The Mogami-class was built with the intention of up gunning the ship from the original 155s to the 203s. The Brooklyn-class was built as a counter to the Mogami-class, when they were built, before they were upgunned to heavy cruisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
585
[ARRGG]
Members
4,674 posts
7,503 battles
1 hour ago, Pacific_Cruiser1942 said:

Like, for example, the Indianapolis?

Yea kinda ,unfortunately bigger does not always mean better At Wows, there is a balance ,speed , agility, detectibilety that not all ships meet all that well, The holy grail of an OP ship does not exist here however the heavy Cruiser may fit someone's playstyle and be OP in the right hands me most likely not being one of em even though I play mostly Cruisers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
371
Members
2,274 posts
7,330 battles

We already have heavy cruisers in game, lots of them. The difference between heavy and light cruiser is the gun calliber, 155mm or smaller os classified as light cruiser, 203mm or higher is classified as heavy cruiser. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,951
[PVE]
Members
8,851 posts
7,257 battles
3 hours ago, LowSpeed_US said:

Hello all,

 

With the changes, and the dare I say the direction this game is headed towards.

Does anyone else think perhaps there is a need for Heavy Cruisers? 

By that I don't mean, cruisers with heavier guns only. But rather a tech tree of cruiser lines that have more tanky characteristics.

 

Discuss...

 

 

 

3 hours ago, tcbaker777 said:

CcvB6KX.gif

Heavy cruiser means cruisers with 8 inch guns or higher, heavy cruisers aren't measured by armor/tankiness, i *think* you may be talking about battlecruisers, sure they didnt have that much armor, but im sure it was more than your average heavy cruiser was sporting during WW2, though, not many battlecruisers were made in WW2 to my knowledge, but if you are refering to battlecruisers, we have some in game, Hood,Amagi(i think) and i believe even Kongo was classified as a battlecruiser at one point

 

 

Yep, the 1919 Treaty of Versailles covered the limitation on Germany's ship building after WWI. Out of that grew the Panzerschiffe Deutschland class cruiser of which the Adm Graf Spee was most famous.

 

The 1922 Washington Naval Treaty (WNT) and the 1930 London Naval Treaty (LNT) capped the weight limits of various classes (BB 35k tons, CL/CA 10k tons, DD 1,850 tons, CV 27k tons), the size of guns on various classes and how many could be built by the US, UK, Japan, France, and Italy. Cruisers were broken into two classes; main armament of above 6.1 inches (155mm), not to exceed 8 inches (203mm) which were colloquially called heavy cruisers (CA) and cruisers not above 6.1 inches (155mm) which were colloquially called light cruisers (CL). Battlecruisers (BC) and battleships (BB) are capital class ships with guns no larger than 16 inches (406mm). Destroyers were capped at 5.1 inches 130mm and carriers were capped at 8 inches (203mm) guns. A country could say that they were opting out of the treaty in a minimum of two years and start construction on a ship that violated the treaty as long as it was completed after the two year period. But you had to opt out before starting construction.

 

Treaty of Versailles   https://www.loc.gov/law/help/us-treaties/bevans/m-ust000002-0043.pdf

 

1922 Washington Naval Treaty   https://www.loc.gov/law/help/us-treaties/bevans/m-ust000002-0351.pdf

 

1930 London Naval Treaty   https://www.loc.gov/law/help/us-treaties/bevans/m-ust000002-1055.pdf

 

We already have heavy cruisers in game, lots of them. The difference between heavy and light cruiser is the gun calliber, 155mm or smaller os classified as light cruiser, 203mm or higher is classified as heavy cruiser. 

 

Heavy Cruisers (CA) are above 155mm, not to exceed 203mm.

 

 

Edited by Kizarvexis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,015
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
16,019 posts
11,539 battles

Cruisers were never intended to be shot at by battleships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,951
[PVE]
Members
8,851 posts
7,257 battles
Just now, crzyhawk said:

Cruisers were never intended to be shot at by battleships.

 

True that. Neither were battlecruisers, but admirals couldn't resist using them in the battle line anyways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
154
[FOXEH]
[FOXEH]
Members
1,194 posts
4,125 battles
33 minutes ago, crzyhawk said:

Cruisers were never intended to be shot at by battleships.

And yet this game imagines that cruisers can kill BBs.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44
[NSEW]
Members
413 posts
7,896 battles

This is quickly becoming a forum of facts and figures of historical data. *thumbs up*

 

Whilst I agree with all of you. The design and usage of particular ship types are known. What is not easily transferred into this game, is that such designs doesn't equate to their intended purpose. i.e. Cruisers not designed to fight with Battleships.

 

Since, this is a game after all (with a touch of historical flavours throughout). This is where my original thought came from for this thread.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,483
[PSP]
Members
6,039 posts
8,582 battles
18 hours ago, tcbaker777 said:

 

Heavy cruiser means cruisers with 8 inch guns or higher, heavy cruisers aren't measured by armor/tankiness

 

Right, the "heavy" refers to heavy artillery. If cruisers were overly armored then they would no longer be cruisers, since they were designed for high speed and long distance travel without too much refueling. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
239
[HC]
[HC]
Beta Testers
1,312 posts
9,404 battles
On 9/13/2017 at 7:56 PM, Doomlock said:

The Mogami-class was built with the intention of up gunning the ship from the original 155s to the 203s. The Brooklyn-class was built as a counter to the Mogami-class, when they were built, before they were upgunned to heavy cruisers.

If they had planned for the upgunning, the guns for turret two would have cleared the back of turret one once they were converted. The twin, 203 mm gun mounts also had a smaller turret ring than the triple 155mm mounts so they are not a direct swap.

Edited by SgtBeltfed
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,708
[HINON]
WoWS Wiki Editor, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
6,498 posts
3,751 battles
3 minutes ago, SgtBeltfed said:

If they had planned for the upgunning, the guns for turret two would have cleared the back of turret one once they were converted. The twin, 203 mm gun mounts also had a smaller turret ring than the triple 155mm mounts so they are not a direct swap.

When first launched, these ships were officially classified as light cruisers, because they were armed with 15 x 6" guns. They had been cleverly designed so that the turret base rings would also accept a dual 8" turret when the time came, and all were re-armed this way shortly before the war.

 

http://combinedfleet.com/ships/mogami

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
239
[HC]
[HC]
Beta Testers
1,312 posts
9,404 battles
45 minutes ago, Doomlock said:

When first launched, these ships were officially classified as light cruisers, because they were armed with 15 x 6" guns. They had been cleverly designed so that the turret base rings would also accept a dual 8" turret when the time came, and all were re-armed this way shortly before the war.

 

http://combinedfleet.com/ships/mogami

They had to build special gun mounts for the 203mm conversion, the 155mm guns had a larger base ring than the 203's. (probably a result of early requirements that the 155mm's be dual purpose, which got abandoned)

http://navweaps.com/Weapons/WNJAP_8-50_3ns.php

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,708
[HINON]
WoWS Wiki Editor, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
6,498 posts
3,751 battles
10 minutes ago, SgtBeltfed said:

They had to build special gun mounts for the 203mm conversion, the 155mm guns had a larger base ring than the 203's. (probably a result of early requirements that the 155mm's be dual purpose, which got abandoned)

http://navweaps.com/Weapons/WNJAP_8-50_3ns.php

Hmm. Did not know that. I only knew they had the design to up gun once the treaties were abandoned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×