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

Premium Ideas - Comprehensive list (Image Heavy)

23 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

170
[-ARP-]
Members
393 posts
3,622 battles

I have gathered up as many ideas for premium ships as I could find (mostly real life ships) and compiled them into one huge list which I will be updating from time to time. I'll list them occasionally by class with members which I think would make suitable premiums, reasons why, and potential stats/gimmicks and what tier would fit the most. Also please feel free to make suggestions.

Starting with:

USA

Bagley class destroyers

1cXrebl.png

Suitable or notable members/sister ships: Ralph Talbot, Patterson 

Tier: 7

The Bagley class has yet to be represented in the game and has a fairly unique torpedo loadout. Four quad torpedo launchers, two launchers on each side. In addition she has the same gunpower as Sims. Ralph Talbot and Patterson has the most battlestars of their class.

 

Porter class destroyers

57c3jmk.png

Suitable or notable members/sister ships: Porter, Selfridge, Phelps

Tier: 9 or 8 (Phelps and Selfridge)

A unique class known as large destroyers by the United States Navy, the Porters were built as flotilla leaders. This is an especially unique class as her members have multiple interesting configurations. The porter class as built has eight non-dual purpose guns in four mounts, with two quad torpedo launchers, plus reloads. The reloads could mean faster torpedo reloads? A suitable trade for this much firepower is larger detection because of her huge size. She was also fast for her size, at 37 knots.

zQZrUCq.png

Here is the 1942 refit of Porter.

aBm0AtI.png

A unique configuration of two dual mounts and one superfiring single gives off a Japanese destroyer vibe. This layout could push Porter down to tier 8, because she would have the same amount of firepower as Benson, in both her torpedoes and main battery. A very unique class indeed.

https://i.imgur.com/4ptlQ1k.png <-- Selfridge in a different camo scheme

Somers class destroyers

ZR8uAyV.png

Suitable or notable members/sister ships: Any member

Tier: 9 or 10

Similar to the Porter class, the Somers carried an extra quad launcher and went at a speed of 39 knots. The Somers class had top heaviness and weight issues, which could be translated by having a slower ruddershift than normal. The Somers class had a less interesting service record however.

V0k4sug.png

Warrington could make a good tier 9 with the removal of her number three turret and one quad launcher, which in turn allowed her to mount more AA guns.

 

Fletcher class destroyers

1HFLvMC.png

Suitable or notable members/sister ships: O'bannon, Hoel, Heerman, Johnston

Tier: 9

Now I know we have too many Fletchers in the game already and I'd argue WG wasted the opportunity by putting in less spectacular ships like USS Black, but that won't stop me from suggesting members that actually had an interesting wartime career. O'bannon for instance was known for throwing potatoes at an IJN submarine before depth charging it. Hoel, Heerman and Johnston, my favourite three Fletchers challenged a vastly superior Japanese force at the Battle off Samar and sank 3-4 cruisers with the help of a destroyer escort and escort carriers. Look it up and read! It's extremely interesting! These three destroyers are in their late war configuration using the square bridge you can also find on Kidd, but with both torpedo launchers.

QaNS6c7.png

https://i.imgur.com/dsuy7Ac.png <-- Heerman. She survived the battle, but Hoel and Johnston were the real stars.

John C. Butler class destroyer escorts

HZikDCD.png

Suitable or notable members/sister ships: Samuel B. Roberts

Tier: 3 or 4

Speaking of the Battle off Samar, I present to you 'the destroyer escort that fought like a battleship'. Samuel B. Roberts assisted Johnston and Hoel and charged the Japanese force at Samar, going well over her designed speed, nearly breaking 30 knots, in order to close in for a torpedo attack and managed to blow off cruiser Choukai's bow, and with her two 5"/38s she set cruiser Chikuma's bridge on fire and disabled her third turret. She was sunk by Kongou. As a destroyer escort she is very slow and very undergunned, which would put her at tier 3 or 4.

Brooklyn class light cruiser

xzHaGf6.png

Suitable or notable members/sister ships: Brooklyn, Boise, Phoenix (this might be a problem since we already have a Phoenix), Nashville, Savannah

Tier: 7

We already know Brooklyn won't be featured in the up and coming US cruiser split, so her class is an obvious choice for a premium ship. As built the Brooklyn class would have less AA firepower than her subclass, the St Louis class. Boise and Phoenix have the most extensive service in their class.

 

Wichita class heavy cruiser

zU8uZim.png

Suitable or notable members/sister ships: Wichita

Tier: 7 or 8

A single ship class derived from the hull of the Brooklyn class, she became the basis of future US heavy cruiser classes. She is somewhat unique as she is a cross between Brooklyn and Baltimore, for the reasons stated above.

qr8MqYO.png

 

Northampton class heavy cruisers

oPTYfe5.png

Suitable or notable members/sister ships: Northampton, Chester, Houston, Chicago, Augusta

Tier: 7

We already have Northampton's subclass represented in the game in the form of USS Indianapolis. The Northampton's have pretty extensive service history. Houston was sunk during the Battle of the Sunda Strait and was the flagship of the fleet at one time. Chester had the most battlestars of her class, which was 11.

 

Alaska class large cruisers

T2TVWoh.png

Suitable or notable members/sister ships: Alaska

Tier: 7 (battleship) or 10 (cruiser)

It's a little weird to see the never-built project 82 (Stalingrad) before the real life Alaska class large cruiser. This rather unique ship has been subject to controversy as to which tier it would fit and what it would be classified as in WoWS terms. It has all the characteristics of a battlecruiser, but the US navy classified it as a large cruiser.

ashJ4Pu.png

EzmiNPY.png

Delaware class battleships

d7Dary2.png

Suitable or notable members/sister ships: Delaware, North Dakota

Tier: 3

I would have prefered the Delaware or Florida class to replace the South Carolina class, seeing as she has been so badly powercreeped by vessels like Bellerophon. Delaware was built before the Florida and Wyoming class, and after South Carolina. Compared to Wyoming she has one less turret and worse firing angles, but it would still be an improvement over South Carolina.

 

Florida class battleships

jczoRKN.png

Suitable or notable members/sister ships: Florida, Utah

Tier: 3

The Florida class was very similiar to the Delawares, but her later refits show her with floatplanes, which could be a cute gimmic. A spotter plane could give her a range advantage over other tier 3s.

 

Nevada class battleships

0LRGung.png

Suitable or notable members/sister ships: Nevada, Oklahoma

Tier: 5

The Nevada's were built after the New York and have the same gunlayout as another tier 5 battleship, the Giulio Cesare. The improved firing arcs on the Nevadas were already be a huge improvement over New York. Oklahoma was torpedoed during the Attack on Pearl Harbour and rolled over. Nevada managed to get underway during the attack and thus her damage wasn't as severe as her sister ship. Nevada saw service in the Atlantic.

 

Tennessee class battleships

EfxPXzW.png

Suitable or notable members/sister ships: Tennessee

Tier: 6

The Tennessee class was built between New Mexico and Colorado and thus she similarities between both classes. Tennessee inherits the guns from New Mexico while receiving the same hull design as Colorado. In addition her latewar rebuild is pretty noteworthy and far more interesting. With her rebuild she losses a few knots of speed which she trades with having better torpedo protection and a huge boost in AA power because of her dual 5"/38s. Also her improved fire control could maybe mean an increase in gun accuracy? I think her rebuild would make an excellent premium.

IFyusoe.png

Colorado class battleships

WAjwzcL.png

Suitable or notable members/sister ships: West Virginia

Tier: 7

Similar to Tennessee the West Virginia received an extensive rebuild. She was also involved in the last battleship gun duel with the Yamashiro during the Battle of the Surigao Strait.

 

Wasp class aircraft carrier

BHTSyHu.png

Suitable or notable members/sister ships: Wasp

Tier: 7

USS Wasp was a one ship class with a busy service career, having served both in the Atlantic and the Pacific, where she was lost. I think she would fit in well with Kaga and Saipan at tier 7.

 

Noteworthy mentions:

USS Yorktown, she had a good early war career and was lost during the Battle of Midway, but we already have Enterprise so she would be redundant.

USS Washington, sank Kirishima during the Guadalcanal campaigns. I my opinion we have enough high tier US battleships already, and if I remember correctly this is already being proposed.

USS Wyoming in her training ship configuration. We cannot have two Wyomings in the game, but otherwise it would make an interesting premium.

Edited by AyanoMidori
  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,946
[PVE]
Members
8,829 posts
7,254 battles

Samuel B Roberts has 3x1 533mm torpedo tubes and the T2 USS Smith has 3x1 450mm tubes. SBR is about the same size as the Wickes, so would have about the same HP as Wickes. Instead of the 4x1 102mm Wickes guns, SBR has 2x1 127mm guns. SBR was rated for 24 kts, but hit almost 30 kts during the Taffy 3 battle, so Smith and SBR would have similar speeds. Wickes' speed is 34 kts. I think SBR could easily be a T2 DD premium for use in an operation for the Taffy 3 battle and the 75th anniversary of that battle is Oct 2019 so time to make the Samuel B Roberts.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Kizarvexis
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
662
[USCC2]
Members
3,423 posts

Maybe the Porter can be the FXP DD and with the variety of fits they can make it as good as the Missouri. (Couldn't see T9 CA/CV in your list).

 

Thank you for all the info/work. +1 :Smile_honoring:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
418
[NATO]
Beta Testers
1,766 posts
5,805 battles

I would expect a second US battleship line in the future, but the Pearl vets after their refit would be very problematic due to their T8 AA suite with T6 guns, protection and speed. There is also enough DD variation for a second full line, but once again that will be much further on since we'll probably get UK, French and Italian DD's first, as well as French and Italian BB's.......and perhaps a bunch of Russian napkin bb's that are over the top, unhistorical and are only included to keep the Russian playerbase happy.

The Wasp would have been a much wiser decision as a T7 premium CV over the Saipan abomination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
811
[SPTR]
Members
25,618 posts
10,807 battles

Fantastic ideas Im suprised to see a DDE in there but then again, the low tier KMS DDs are ocean going torpedo boats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
399
[FALCO]
Alpha Tester
998 posts
5,203 battles
3 hours ago, AyanoMidori said:

Suitable or notable members/sister ships: Brooklyn, Boise, Phoenix (this might be a problem since we already have a Phoenix), Nashville, Savannah

Tier: 7

We already know Brooklyn won't be featured in the up and coming US cruiser split, so her class is an obvious choice for a premium ship. As built the Brooklyn class would have less AA firepower than her subclass, the St Louis class. Boise and Phoenix have the most extensive service in their class.

Simple way to solve:

Dont add Phoenix to the american tree, for that just use the others ones of the class. Add her as the ARA Belgrano for the Pan-SA tech tree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,946
[PVE]
Members
8,829 posts
7,254 battles
25 minutes ago, Rolkatsuki said:

Fantastic ideas Im suprised to see a DDE in there but then again, the low tier KMS DDs are ocean going torpedo boats.

 

Samuel B Roberts performed way above expectations for a DDE in that battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
811
[SPTR]
Members
25,618 posts
10,807 battles

No reservations for France? /T_\\

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,940
[SYN]
Members
14,366 posts
10,228 battles

You left out Bagley-class with their 4x Quad launchers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
439
[4HIM]
Members
1,701 posts
3,864 battles

Would love to see the Samuel B Roberts given her history and the actions off Samar.  Agree she would be a great event ship.  Or the Johnston with Commander Evans.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,946
[PVE]
Members
8,829 posts
7,254 battles
1 minute ago, ZARDOZ_II said:

Would love to see the Samuel B Roberts given her history and the actions off Samar.  Agree she would be a great event ship.  Or the Johnston with Commander Evans.  


The post below is a request for an Oct 2019 event for the 75th anniversary of the Taffy 3 battle. Please pop in with your support as they have time to make Samuel B Roberts as a T2/3 premium DD and have a nice event.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[-ARP-]
Members
393 posts
3,622 battles
6 hours ago, MrDeaf said:

You left out Bagley-class with their 4x Quad launchers.

I didn't. It's the first destroyer on the list :Smile_Default:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[-ARP-]
Members
393 posts
3,622 battles
6 hours ago, Rolkatsuki said:

No reservations for France? /T_\\

I'd rather wait for full lines. Japan, Germany and USA have full lines at the moment. I won't be suggesting much for the British yet as they don't have destroyers yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[-ARP-]
Members
393 posts
3,622 battles

I don't know how I forgot the Alaska class. I've added it above battleships and below cruisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,122
[ARGSY]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,106 posts
18,622 battles

How about USS Benham aka the USN Shima?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[-ARP-]
Members
393 posts
3,622 battles
7 hours ago, Erebthoron said:

How about USS Benham aka the USN Shima?

That is also a possibality, they are basically the same as the Bagley and Gridley class destroyers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
173
[SIDE]
Members
714 posts
3,131 battles
18 hours ago, AyanoMidori said:

Somers class destroyers

ZR8uAyV.png

Suitable or notable members/sister ships: Any member

Tier: 9 or 10

Similar to the Porter class, the Somers carried an extra quad launcher and went at a speed of 39 knots. The Somers class had top heaviness and weight issues, which could be translated by having a slower ruddershift than normal. The Somers class had a less interesting service record however.

The Tier 10 Panasia DD is a Somers class DD. So the likelyhood of getting another tier 10 clone as a premium is super low. =(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[-ARP-]
Members
393 posts
3,622 battles
1 minute ago, Merlox said:

The Tier 10 Panasia DD is a Somers class DD. So the likelyhood of getting another tier 10 clone as a premium is super low. =(

The tier 10 is an Allen M. Sumner class, which was based on the Fletcher hull. The Somers was a destroyer leader built well before the Fletcher class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
173
[SIDE]
Members
714 posts
3,131 battles
Just now, AyanoMidori said:

The tier 10 is an Allen M. Sumner class, which was based on the Fletcher hull. The Somers was a destroyer leader built well before the Fletcher class.

Well, I stand corrected. So many DD... Ahhh Either way. With the Stalingrad coming along. Let's just hope the Alaska finds it's way as a tier 10 cruiser. =)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[-ARP-]
Members
393 posts
3,622 battles

I'd be fine wherever Alaska goes. It's basically a mini Iowa and I'd love to play it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×