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

78 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
974 posts
1,871 battles

So I know there are two options for the Tier X Italian cruiser 

-the Spanish cruiser MK2

A standard tier X cruiser with 4x3 203mm guns

-the other is a unique Cruiser with 2x2 3x2 10in guns

so I would like to know what are the Pros and Cons of each design i'm sure @Phoenix_jz could fill me in

Edited by skull_122_steel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
698
[UFFA]
[UFFA]
Beta Testers
3,749 posts
3,788 battles

Hindenburg/Zao vs Moskva/Henri IV. 

It would all depend on the interpretation of the 254/55 vs modernized interpretation of the 203/53. Im sure there may have been a newer 203mm at least dreamed up by an Ansaldo or OTO designer. Finding it.....

203/55 would probably be 960mps at decent reload. There would be a lot of 90mm aa. 

254/55 depends on interpretation. Probably the longest reload this side of the forthcoming Soviet battlecruiser. Some say around 900 mps. I’d guess a bit more conservative number since the guiding hand of Stalin is not involved. 

Neither ship should play close for obvious reasons. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
578 posts
990 battles

This topic is so nerdy I forgot I was wearing glasses XD

I would agree with Sparviero on the fact that it is highly dependent on the interpretation of the 254/55, although I would prefer that model over the 203/53 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
698
[UFFA]
[UFFA]
Beta Testers
3,749 posts
3,788 battles

I just realized the armament given was ~280mm. Are you referencing one of the super Zara designs before settling in Zara? The Ansaldo project for Russia I thought had a more contemporary layout with actual Russian rifles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
717
[NEUTR]
Members
2,207 posts
6,053 battles

RM high tier CAs are going to be nuts in WoWS in the current meta. 10 incher fast firing guns with Italian flavor extra pen AP, 40 [edited]knots. Imagine a Scharnhorst that moves at 40 knots, has 12 10 inchers, equivalent armor, GG WG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,034
[WUDPS]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
4,739 posts
4,533 battles
1 hour ago, NeutralState said:

RM high tier CAs are going to be nuts in WoWS in the current meta. 10 incher fast firing guns with Italian flavor extra pen AP, 40 [edited]knots. Imagine a Scharnhorst that moves at 40 knots, has 12 10 inchers, equivalent armor, GG WG.

I highly doubt it'll be that OP, more likely WG will find a way to butcher the Russian design for "Italian flavor" easy to citadel, bad HE...yeah

Yet then again we've never seen Italian 203's so I may very well be wrong. Does anyone have examples they would like to share so we have a visual representation? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
110
[NEIN]
Beta Testers
582 posts
5,997 battles
1 hour ago, Dr_Venture said:

I highly doubt it'll be that OP, more likely WG will find a way to butcher the Russian design for "Italian flavor" easy to citadel, bad HE...yeah

Yet then again we've never seen Italian 203's so I may very well be wrong. Does anyone have examples they would like to share so we have a visual representation? 

WNIT_8-53_m1927_Bolzano_stern_pic.jpg

WNIT_8-53_m1927_Zara_guns_pic.jpg

 

WNIT_8-53_m1927_Zara_stern_pic.jpg

 

From Navweaps, the barrels are close together ala Duca, so dispersion was a concern.  Otherwise, they were fairly high performance at the cost of barrel wear.  Rate of fire is anywhere from 16-30 seconds, I'd imagine the loading process was highly dependent on a skilled crew being well rested (a lot of manual handling).  Note these are turrets mounting the 1927 203mm/53 guns used on Zara and Bolzano.  

 

The only real life example of a 254mm gun would be this:  

 

WNIT_10-45_M1908_San_Giorgio_pic.jpg

WNIT_10-45_M1908_Pisa_pic.jpg

The main guns on these two ships are 254mm/45 guns, they are to the best of my knowledge the last of their size to be designed for Italy.  A theoretical modern version could be considered if WG wanted another large gun cruiser.  The gun's stats would be up in the air then because we're talking about 30+ years of gun development since then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,034
[WUDPS]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
4,739 posts
4,533 battles

I imagine we will get an Italian version of the Hidenburg with worse torps and worse HE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
698
[UFFA]
[UFFA]
Beta Testers
3,749 posts
3,788 battles

And there is the usual common cradle response. Tier X will be a modern triple that will more resemble the triple found on Garibaldi or Littorio than the common cradle which had been left behind with the Abruzzi class design in 1933. Thanks for obsessing over common cradle though as if Italy was the only nation to make use of it. Too bad, because in this game it actually helps. :Smile-_tongue:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
110
[NEIN]
Beta Testers
582 posts
5,997 battles
4 minutes ago, SparvieroVV said:

And there is the usual common cradle response. Tier X will be a modern triple that will more resemble the triple found on Garibaldi or Littorio than the common cradle which had been left behind with the Abruzzi class design in 1933. Thanks for obsessing over common cradle though as if Italy was the only nation to make use of it. Too bad, because in this game it actually helps. :Smile-_tongue:

To be fair, Italy did increase the distance between gun axis, from 100cm to 127cm in the Garibaldi turrets, and did prove to have superior dispersion to their predecessors.  It isn't a matter of whether Italy was capable, they just didn't have the resources or time to develop a larger project.  Feel free to bring out designs or napkin drawings, WG is going to need them.  Not sure why you had this reaction honestly...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,360 posts
3,915 battles

It'd likely look like an expanded version of this:

Ql31Anp.jpg

So... my guess is either a 10 x 8" layout aping the GC, or a 12 x 8" layout where the doubles are just replaced with triples, some of the 90 mm AA turrets borrowed from the Littorios (simply because they looked cool), 3x torpedoes per side (possibly slow but very long range like those we've already seen on Italian cruisers), and a not-so-impressive secondary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,034
[WUDPS]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
4,739 posts
4,533 battles
4 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_NewZealand said:

It'd likely look like an expanded version of this:

Ql31Anp.jpg

So... my guess is either a 10 x 8" layout aping the GC, or a 12 x 8" layout where the doubles are just replaced with triples, some of the 90 mm AA turrets borrowed from the Littorios (simply because they looked cool), 3x torpedoes per side (possibly slow but very long range like those we've already seen on Italian cruisers), and a not-so-impressive secondary.

I'm sure we will see improved designs from the 90s. If I recall Italy was developing a better HE shell...so there is always hope in that department.

Wouldn't it be funny if they made it a GREAT brawler.

"Mama Mia! Luigi get the 90's ready...we gotta spit the fireballs"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,360 posts
3,915 battles
16 minutes ago, Dr_Venture said:

I'm sure we will see improved designs from the 90s. If I recall Italy was developing a better HE shell...so there is always hope in that department.

Wouldn't it be funny if they made it a GREAT brawler.

"Mama Mia! Luigi get the 90's ready...we gotta spit the fireballs"

Well, I will say this: the Italians were very displeased with the Trento class - they believed that far too many attributes had bee sacrificed to achieve the +35 knot speed, in particular armor. This is why the Zaras wound up being some of the most well-protected heavy cruisers ever actually built. So, in a way, it wouldn't surprise me if the tier X cruiser wound up continuing this trend, turning into some Italian version of the Hindy. Certainly, IRL, that was the way things were heading. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,034
[WUDPS]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
4,739 posts
4,533 battles
17 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_NewZealand said:

Well, I will say this: the Italians were very displeased with the Trento class - they believed that far too many attributes had bee sacrificed to achieve the +35 knot speed, in particular armor. This is why the Zaras wound up being some of the most well-protected heavy cruisers ever actually built. So, in a way, it wouldn't surprise me if the tier X cruiser wound up continuing this trend, turning into some Italian version of the Hindy. Certainly, IRL, that was the way things were heading. 

12 8 inch guns, comes complete with obscene AP that can citadel battleships.

HE....hah dream on. 

italy.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,034
[WUDPS]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
4,739 posts
4,533 battles

Maybe a Littorio styled battlecruiser? 

battlecruiser_littorio_style_by_tzoli-d4ul8va.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
698
[UFFA]
[UFFA]
Beta Testers
3,749 posts
3,788 battles
49 minutes ago, Iridium81 said:

To be fair, Italy did increase the distance between gun axis, from 100cm to 127cm in the Garibaldi turrets, and did prove to have superior dispersion to their predecessors.  It isn't a matter of whether Italy was capable, they just didn't have the resources or time to develop a larger project.  Feel free to bring out designs or napkin drawings, WG is going to need them.  Not sure why you had this reaction honestly...

Talking about the tier X and you bring up a 1920s turret design feature for saving weight that has nothing to do with how the Tier X will look. Please feel free to play innocent. :cap_popcorn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
698
[UFFA]
[UFFA]
Beta Testers
3,749 posts
3,788 battles
6 minutes ago, Dr_Venture said:

Maybe a Littorio styled battlecruiser? 

battlecruiser_littorio_style_by_tzoli-d4ul8va.png

That's a 26500t design with 343/55 rifles as tzoli stylizes it. I'd love to see it as the tier VII battleship. :cap_cool:

 

https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/7869-design-1933-battlecruiser/

 

Afaik most people talk about the Spanish ansaldo or Ansaldo for Russia. If anything else is a valid choice I'd love to know.  You can see both projects listed in frosty's latest article.

 

http://shipcomrade.com/news/358/fr05tys-attempt-at-divination-italian-cruiser-tech-tree.html

 

As well as Demon's thread

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
110
[NEIN]
Beta Testers
582 posts
5,997 battles
41 minutes ago, SparvieroVV said:

Talking about the tier X and you bring up a 1920s turret design feature for saving weight that has nothing to do with how the Tier X will look. Please feel free to play innocent. :cap_popcorn:

They were asking for references, they are the only things that exist in history relative to the topic.  What else would you have someone show?  Seriously, I'm beginning to think you have issues that don't stem with the topic at hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
698
[UFFA]
[UFFA]
Beta Testers
3,749 posts
3,788 battles
18 hours ago, skull_122_steel said:

So I know there are two options for the Tier X Italian cruiser 

-the Spanish cruiser MK2

A standard tier X cruiser with 4x3 203mm guns

-the other is a unique Cruiser with 4x2 11in guns

so I would like to know what are the Pros and Cons of each design i'm sure @Phoenix_jz could fill me in

 

9 minutes ago, Iridium81 said:

They were asking for references, they are the only things that exist in history relative to the topic.  What else would you have someone show?  Seriously, I'm beginning to think you have issues that don't stem with the topic at hand.

Where where they asking for references? :cap_popcorn:

 

Pros and Cons of two specific designs. :cap_like:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
110
[NEIN]
Beta Testers
582 posts
5,997 battles
4 minutes ago, SparvieroVV said:

 

Where where they asking for references? :cap_popcorn:

 

Pros and Cons of two specific designs. :cap_like:

 

3 hours ago, Dr_Venture said:

I highly doubt it'll be that OP, more likely WG will find a way to butcher the Russian design for "Italian flavor" easy to citadel, bad HE...yeah

Yet then again we've never seen Italian 203's so I may very well be wrong. Does anyone have examples they would like to share so we have a visual representation? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
698
[UFFA]
[UFFA]
Beta Testers
3,749 posts
3,788 battles

You actually think Venture doesn't know what the 203/50 and 203/53 on actual ships looked like?  :cap_fainting:Once again we are referring to the Tier X choices as asked by the OP. Way to just dig in your heels :cap_like:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
234
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
1,501 posts
8,037 battles
5 hours ago, NeutralState said:

RM high tier CAs are going to be nuts in WoWS in the current meta. 10 incher fast firing guns with Italian flavor extra pen AP, 40 [edited]knots. Imagine a Scharnhorst that moves at 40 knots, has 12 10 inchers, equivalent armor, GG WG.

Scharnhorst has 2 armor belts so no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
110
[NEIN]
Beta Testers
582 posts
5,997 battles
1 hour ago, SparvieroVV said:

You actually think Venture doesn't know what the 203/50 and 203/53 on actual ships looked like?  :cap_fainting:Once again we are referring to the Tier X choices as asked by the OP. Way to just dig in your heels :cap_like:

I think you started this conversation with an attitude problem, and assumed I should know what someone else knows.  I also think you believe that i have some anti-Italian bent when it couldn't be farther than the truth.  Paper designs are all fine and well, but looking at design lineage and extrapolating on it is a common practice.  Sorry if I expected the thread to be for anyone interested rather than a select few all ready in the know.  Do you always assume the worst intention upon reading something?  It's no wonder the community is getting more divisive and virulent.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,358
[HINON]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,197 posts
2,029 battles

@Dr_Venture You're looking at the wrong cruiser for that picture. The Ansaldo designs to Spain shared a similar hull but 3 different armaments. One was a 4x3 152mm cruiser. The heavy cruiser projects were either 4x2 or 3x3, the latter one being likely as a tier IX successor to the Zara-class.

 

To the more general audience;

 

Italy's probably got 3 options for a tier X cruiser.

 


Primo -

The Ansaldo super cruiser project for Russia. With 26700 tons max displacement, she's somewhat between Henri IV and Moskva is displacement. With a massive 240000shp power plant, she was to be capable of 37 knots (like the cruiser designs for Spain).

Her armor values as of now are lost to history, although similar Russian projects around the time (because we all know how much the Russians like to take Italian designs, develop something based off of them, and call it their own) had 220mm belts and 90mm decks... so perhaps something similar to that? It's hard to translate actual Italian design trends into the game because had they built more cruisers, it's very likely they would have started putting composite decapping belts on them (as was done with Abruzzi). Given that they seemed to believe the presence of a decapping plate was a 50-60% improvement over the thickness of the belt behind it (Littorio's scheme allowing the 280mm belt to deflect was should've required 440mm of armor to block, And Abruzzi's decapping scheme (100mm main belt ) being judged the same projection as Zara's 150mm belt), a future heavy cruiser design seeking to get 220mm of effective armor might've stuck a 50mm decapping plate on to ensure protection from cruiser-caliber guns, even ones up to 283mm (and Type 1 305mm shells). Still, you're probably looking at even tougher armor than the prior 203mm heavy cruisers.

The main guns would've been 254mm/55's, which I assume would result in a smiler translation from the 254/45's of the San Giorgio-class that Henri iV's guns got from the elderly French 240mm/50 that was used to help make the /55 used by the tier X cruiser. (220kg shells, but from 800 to 845mps MV). The Italian 254/45's fire a 227 kg projectile at 870mps, so it's quite probable to see a similar shell weight but at an increased muzzle velocity, perhaps 900mps? As typical of Italian large-caliber shells of the 1930s, their drag values would probably be very good like on the 381/50. Most likely the result would be punchier, but slower-firing guns compared to Henri IV and Moskva.


Secondo -

WG Fudge CA #1 - Italian Hindi. "What?" I hear you say. Well, basically an Italian version of Hindenburg/Roon/Any tier X BB that isn't Yamato or Montana.

When WG doesn't have an option for a tier X of a line (and sometimes, as we've seen, their IX), they fudge things. Even entire hulls, in some cases. This basically turns into WG giving it their best shot as to what they think said nation's designers would've come up with next, had they done so. This usually involves re-working some of the more iconic layouts from said country's pedigree of prior ships in the type. For the Italians, my guess would be that this would be a similarly  fast and well armed cruiser, but probably smaller overall, and with an armament of 10x 203mm guns, in the iconic 2x3, 2x2 layout of the Abruzzi-class CLs and the rebuilt BBs (Cavour and Duilio classes). Whether they'd call them 203/55's or /53's, they'd probably use the original ballistics of the 203/53, which was to fire a 125.3 kg (about 8crh) AP shells at 960mps, while the HE (110.57 kg) would be fired at 940mps. The result would be very powerful guns, the strongest non-SHS 203mm guns in the game, falling roughly between the German 203mm guns and the American SHS is penetration, and second only to Zao's kaijukannonsTM in flight time (although the German 203 stands a good chance of catching up at longer ranges due to it's excellent drag qualities). This would be the option if WG wants to end the line in a more 'conventional' manner, especially as our remaining options for cruiser lines aren't likely to do so (The American getting a tier X light cruiser, and the best option for a British tier X would be another supercruiser, with 234mm guns. A Pan Latin-American line would probably end up using light cruisers, as would a Pan-European one).


Terzo -

WG Fudge CA #2 - Italian DM. I hear an even bigger "What?" Well, this is our other option. The Italians weren't know for high RoF pre-war, but post war some guns saw some pretty impressive jumps in RoF - most notably the 135mm guns, which went from around 7 rpm to 20 rpm when upgraded and put on the Giuseppe Garibaldi. Basically this would be to the Spanish CA what Des Moines is to Baltimore. Auto-loading 203mm guns, which would be kind of unique. Seeing as their ballistics are so much better than DM's guns, I'd say the RoF should probably be lower - maybe closer to 7 or 8 rpm. It would mesh well with the autoloading flavor WG is trying to put on to the high tier Italian tanks in WoT. It's a crazy idea I know, but who knows?


 

Most likely though, you're picking between a 203mm or 254mm gun, and the size of the ship will be affected by that. If it's anything like what Italian CA development was headed for, it's probably going to be fast, well armored, and fairly stealthy - I wouldn't expect long range like on Henri IV or Moskva.

 

I will be curious to see what they do for the naming conventions though - the heavy cruisers were all named after redeemed cities of WWI. However not too many major cities are available after the 7 WWII CA's... and I really doubt they're going to be so cheeky as to to pick on post war scenarios and call one of the ships 'Nizza' or 'Ajaccio' :Smile-_tongue:. They could go back and use cities redeemed in even older wars - for example, 'Venezia'.

My guess would be that they'd switch back to famous person names, as was used on the light cruisers. Perhaps this is exactly the reason they decided not to use Garibaldi as a premium? It would be hard to find a better name for an Italian tier X, and such a name was used on Armored Cruisers from the WWI era.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×