Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Hot_tamale25

What I'd like to see for US/RN cruiser spilts

6 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

29
[WOLFX]
Members
214 posts
1,718 battles

1. USS Houston (CA-30) premium. I will refrain myself from going on a rant as to why the Northampton should've been included instead of the Pensacola.

2. HMS Exeter premium in her River Plate configuration

3. USS Wichita Premium (CA-45). Not quite sure why she isn't in game yet as she is an ideal tier viii premium

4. USS Constellation (CC-5). Tier VII premium Lexington class battlecruiser similar to HMS Hood

5. I am fine with the USN light cruiser proposal as is although I feel the tier VI Dallas is redundant, the line should branch off Pensacola

Now let's get to what I really want, a proper USN and RN cruiser split

         US CA-Heavy                            US CA-Light                          US Cruiser Premiums                        RN CA                           RN Cruiser Premiums

II                                                                                                                                                                         Active                            Good Hope

III                                                                                                                                                                        Monmouth

IV                                                                                                                                                                        Design B3

V                                                                                                                                                                         Hawkins                       Exeter 1939

VI       Northampton                          Pensacola                                 Houston                                             York***

VII      Portland                                   New Orleans                             Indy, Atlanta, Flint                            Kent                              Australia or Canberra (Commonwealth), Belfast,  Gloucester****

VIII     Wichita                                     Baltimore                                  Santa Fe                                             Surrey

IX       Buffalo                                      Oregon City**                                                                                       3x3 cruiser design

X        Alaska*                                     Des Moines                               Salem                                                Churchill super cruiser

* With the Stalingrad at tier X it makes sense to assume it is a test bed for  the much anticipated Alaska

** Once fully upgraded the Balti is very underrated at tier IX as is, Oregon City is just an upgraded Baltimore. The less paper, the better

*** York's A hull will be York herself while the B hull will be Exeter in 1942 or a fictional Exeter upgrade

**** Gloucester was chosen as I find her final stand to be quite heroic and worth of note, she fills the gap left by the removal of Belfast and essentially becomes Belfast without heal, concealment mod and radar. Gloucester would retain HE but would receive a Perth style smoke. Gloucester retains her torps and can run Hydro, DFAA and Spotter all at once.

READ THIS!!!!!!!!!!!

Much of the Royal Navy tree I presented is directly from Trainspite's very detailed Royal Navy proposal. It is worth a look.

https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/64198-royal-navy-tech-tree-proposal/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,715
[ARGSY]
Members
5,793 posts
3,942 battles

I see no sense in putting York and Exeter in separate tiers when they have the same basic profile (3 x 2 eight-inch). It might be interesting to have a sidegrade of the Hawkins class as a C hull with the 9 x 6" gun WW2 refit, which would be interesting when it came to sequential fire. Up close, it might make a very interesting citadel-generating machine due solely to the number of turrets and the consequent continuity of fire. AP/HE on the 7.5" guns, switching to AP-only on the 6" refit (for those who chose to purchase and mount it rather than just researching it on the way to the Exeter/York or whatever came after).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,584
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,294 battles

Some thoughts...

1. I agree that the RN definitely needs a new premium cruiser, whether a light or heavy cruiser (preferably, both), since the Belfast was removed from sale.

2. As for the Lexington class battlecruisers, I'd personally expect the named ship to be the Saratoga, because it was a ship that was actually built, albeit as a CV.  They'd probably be a good fit at tier 7, since it's fairly similar to the Hood.

3. The USN could use some additional premium cruisers, at tier 6 and/or 8.  But they should wait until after the CL/CA split settles everything out.

4. I don't know if there's really enough real RN CA's to build a CA  tree around without using too many unbuilt designs or outright fictional (created from whole cloth) designs.  Premium CA's are easy enough.  A full CA line, or even one that starts at around tier 5 or 6 or 7, I don't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29
[WOLFX]
Members
214 posts
1,718 battles
12 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

I see no sense in putting York and Exeter in separate tiers when they have the same basic profile (3 x 2 eight-inch). It might be interesting to have a sidegrade of the Hawkins class as a C hull with the 9 x 6" gun WW2 refit, which would be interesting when it came to sequential fire. Up close, it might make a very interesting citadel-generating machine due solely to the number of turrets and the consequent continuity of fire. AP/HE on the 7.5" guns, switching to AP-only on the 6" refit (for those who chose to purchase and mount it rather than just researching it on the way to the Exeter/York or whatever came after).

It's similar to say Mutsu and Nagato. Exeter in her River Platte configuration would be just a straight downgrade in terms of say HP, AA and RoF compared to the fully upgraded York. So as compensation she is dropped down a tier to V. Also, given Furutaka's 3x2 C hull it's debatable whether York/Exeter is even worthy of tier V.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
68
Members
542 posts
2,854 battles

A couple of things:

First, the USN heavy and light lines have already been decided.

Second, totally agree with you that we need Alaska, not sure if it's gonna be a T7bb like scharn or T9-10 CA like the crazy russian ones

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,715
[ARGSY]
Members
5,793 posts
3,942 battles
1 hour ago, Hot_tamale25 said:

It's similar to say Mutsu and Nagato. Exeter in her River Platte configuration would be just a straight downgrade in terms of say HP, AA and RoF compared to the fully upgraded York. So as compensation she is dropped down a tier to V. Also, given Furutaka's 3x2 C hull it's debatable whether York/Exeter is even worthy of tier V.

You can't put a 3 x 2 turreted 8" at Tier IV, though; she would break the RN cruiser meta, which is for single-gun open-mount ships at this tier. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×