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

Would Wyoming in gunnery training config be balanced at T4?

38 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,571
[BIAS]
Members
3,047 posts
9,016 battles

I would love to see this in the game, either as a premium or as another hull for the Wyoming. It was refitted as a Naval gunnery training ship during WW2 and redesignated as AG-17. It had its main batteries removed and had 4 2x127/38 DP guns installed on it as well as 2 single mounts. My question would be whether it would be balanced at T4 if it got the same range but a little less alpha than the Atlanta? I think it would be a blast to try out.

It has a turret layout issue, in that 4 of its 10 guns can only shoot at targets on its starboard side. It did not have mirrored setup on the port side. It would be a monster AA ship at t4, perhaps putting it at t5 would help balance it out? Or would it work at T4?

 Image result for uss wyoming gunnery

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,433
[OPGS]
Beta Testers
3,207 posts
5,669 battles

LOL I was going to ask for this the other day, you beat me to it. I think it would be good for training new CV players to identify which ships have high AA and should be avoided. I can't tell you how many CV players have tried to sink my Texas in a T4 or 5 CV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,571
[BIAS]
Members
3,047 posts
9,016 battles
7 minutes ago, Belthorian said:

LOL I was going to ask for this the other day, you beat me to it. I think it would be good for training new CV players to identify which ships have high AA and should be avoided. I can't tell you how many CV players have tried to sink my Texas in a T4 or 5 CV.

I have a couple clear skies in Texas. one of them came in a single cv match. He tried hard....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,085
[SIM]
Members
2,438 posts
4,080 battles

It sounds kind of terrible, but it would be novel I suppose. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
618
[WOLF1]
[WOLF1]
Members
2,765 posts
1,320 battles
19 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

I have a couple clear skies in Texas. one of them came in a single cv match. He tried hard....

First time I took Texas out, some CV tried to sink me.  He eventually succeeded, but I had 24 plane kills, too.  While he wasted his time on me, my team won the game.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,374
[-K-]
Members
5,075 posts
8,956 battles

So it would be like a slow as balls but tough as hell Atlanta at T4.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
630 posts
705 battles

Give it 8 second reload and it could be pretty good, for lols you can shave the reload down to 6 seconds and make it tier 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,721
[ARGSY]
Members
5,800 posts
3,966 battles

I suspect in the interest of balance they would take the two singles off and make them a double on the other side, or perhaps even take the wing double off and have dual singles on each side, keeping the total of ten guns. 

An asymmetric ship might be fun to play, at least until everyone recognised its weakness and went for the left side. You'd be like that legendary one-eyed stag which spent its life with its blind side turned to the sea, completely safe from hunters until a bunch of sailors rowed in and shot it.

There is a video somewhere of a thing called the Salem Witch, basically a Des Moines nerfed to 17 knots but with everything else untouched, going up against a T4 and T5 team and getting 13 kills - (Mejash on Youtube has it). It was a one-off Halloween event.

I suspect a similar thing would happen here. Provided you could get to a place, you would murder everything you came across.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
266
[SEOP]
Members
1,286 posts
56 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

I would love to see this in the game, either as a premium or as another hull for the Wyoming. It was refitted as a Naval gunnery training ship during WW2 and redesignated as AG-17. It had its main batteries removed and had 4 2x127/38 DP guns installed on it as well as 2 single mounts. My question would be whether it would be balanced at T4 if it got the same range but a little less alpha than the Atlanta? I think it would be a blast to try out.

It has a turret layout issue, in that 4 of its 10 guns can only shoot at targets on its starboard side. It did not have mirrored setup on the port side. It would be a monster AA ship at t4, perhaps putting it at t5 would help balance it out? Or would it work at T4?

 Image result for uss wyoming gunnery

yes and yes.  Give it a speed boost to account for the massive weight reduction from removal of the six 12" gun turrets.

I'd say give it some torp tubes too -- but that would be stretching it.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
253
[REVY]
Members
938 posts
7,309 battles
16 minutes ago, Dr_Dirt said:

yes and yes.  Give it a speed boost to account for the massive weight reduction from removal of the six 12" gun turrets.

It also lacks it's belt armor, that would add some speed, but even a DD will be able to Cit it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
459
[MIA-A]
Members
2,014 posts
9,612 battles

I think it would have to be in game as a cruiser as having it as a BB would handicap your team. It would be an interesting but I don't think necessarily good ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
266
[SEOP]
Members
1,286 posts
25 minutes ago, Lord_Slayer said:

It also lacks it's belt armor, that would add some speed, but even a DD will be able to Cit it.

no belt armor -- ouch.  that doesn't sound as fun.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LHG]
Members
1,618 posts
4,887 battles

I think she would be very interesting at T4, but I think you'd want her armored belt restored.  It was removed in the 1930's and stored for potential restoration should one of the naval treaties lapse.

Another interesting configuration is her outfit at the beginning of WW II after her 1938 refit. 

9Ufr4p.jpg

In this configuration, she retains six of her 12 inch guns as well as an enhanced AA outfit.  If you give her her armored belt back, she might make an interesting AA heavy ship that still has some useful main battery firepower. Once again her AA is unbalanced in this configuration.  She carries four 5 inch/38 and four 3 inch/50's on the right side, four 5 inch/25's and a number of light AA guns to the left.  

Even if she doesn't get her armored belt back, she still retains her armored deck, barrettes and fore and aft bulkheads as these were never removed. 

Just as a note, the Navy seriously considered fully reactivating Wyoming in 1942 but the growing importance of aircraft carriers and her inability to keep up with them made her restoration impractical. 

Another interesting ship is USS Utah, a former battleship first converted into a mobile target vessel in the late 20's and then refitted in early 1941 as an AA training vessel.  She is the practically unknown battleship sunk at Pearl Harbor anchored around the head of Ford Island from battleship row.  The Japanese mistook her for an operational battleship and put a number of torpedoes into her port side and she sunk at her moorings.  A later attempt to right her failed when her keel slipped on the bottom where she still remains. 

This is her just after her 1941 refit. 

GbiKlu.jpg

 

Edited by BB3_Oregon_Steel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
293
[S0L0]
Members
850 posts
4,654 battles

Idea has been around for a while... You are missing an additional 4 5"/38's, they are on the left side, just less obvious since they are in un-armoured DD style mounts. I also did a napkin sketch version of a full on flack barge for anti kamikaze duty, to protect the theoretical invasion of Japan.  Ended up with 12 5"/38 dual mounts, 4 5"/38 enclosed singles, 8 quad Bofors, 2 twins and a smattering of 20mm twins.  All that still weighed much less than the main battery and turrets they pulled off...

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,433
[OPGS]
Beta Testers
3,207 posts
5,669 battles
49 minutes ago, Dr_Dirt said:

yes and yes.  Give it a speed boost to account for the massive weight reduction from removal of the six 12" gun turrets.

I'd say give it some torp tubes too -- but that would be stretching it.   

Actually, I doubt that she got a meaningful speed boost, in hydrodynamics the overall length of the waterline and the power propelling the ship have much more to do with speed than weight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LHG]
Members
1,618 posts
4,887 battles
6 hours ago, mobryan said:

Idea has been around for a while... You are missing an additional 4 5"/38's, they are on the left side, just less obvious since they are in un-armoured DD style mounts. I also did a napkin sketch version of a full on flack barge for anti kamikaze duty, to protect the theoretical invasion of Japan.  Ended up with 12 5"/38 dual mounts, 4 5"/38 enclosed singles, 8 quad Bofors, 2 twins and a smattering of 20mm twins.  All that still weighed much less than the main battery and turrets they pulled off...

 

 

 

Actually, I thought the 5 inch guns on the port side were the older 5 inch/25 caliber guns rather than the newer 5 inch/38 caliber guns on the starboard side.  Would have made sense in her role as a gunner training vessel to have both types aboard since the 5 inch/25 cal was pretty commonly used on a number of the earlier treaty cruisers (up through the Brooklyn class) and more than a few of the standard battleships as DP weapons.  The cruisers continued to use the 5 inch/25 throughout the war as did some of the BB's.  The 5 inch/38 caliber guns really didn't get mounted on the older battleships until they rebuilt the sunk battleships at Pearl Harbor to accommodate them.  

I actually think Wyomings retained these 5 inch/25's even after her war time refit which removed the rest of her main battery and added dual 5 inch/38 turrets in their place. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LHG]
Members
1,618 posts
4,887 battles
6 hours ago, Belthorian said:

Actually, I doubt that she got a meaningful speed boost, in hydrodynamics the overall length of the waterline and the power propelling the ship have much more to do with speed than weight.

Well she also lost her torpedo bulges which created a decent amount of hydrodynamic resistance but I haven't found anything on her performance data after her refit to a training vessel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
293
[S0L0]
Members
850 posts
4,654 battles
27 minutes ago, BB3_Oregon_Steel said:

 

I actually think Wyomings retained these 5 inch/25's even after her war time refit which removed the rest of her main battery and added dual 5 inch/38 turrets in their place. 

 

Friedman is very clear about the armament. U.S. Battleships pg. 383, in reference to the battery in 1942, mentions zero 5"/25's, and " 4 single 5in/38, two on each side [of the deckhouse], the two to starboard were enclosed mounts." Page 387, in reference to the battery in 1944: "That made a total of fourteen 5in/38, eight in twin and 6 in single mounts." There is zero reference to the 5in/25 being onboard the AG-17 version of Wyoming. If you want to argue with Norman Friedman about US naval history, feel free. I'll hold your coat...

You may be confusing the Wyoming with the Utah, which did have a limited number of 5in/25's onboard from summer 1939 until her loss at Pearl Harbor.

 

Matt

 

Edited by mobryan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
256 posts
5,885 battles

Not sure about this but if we expressing love for the US 5/38, I would nominate the HMS Delhi, a British Danae cruiser equipped with 5 single 5/38 dp mounts (and 8? 40mm bofors? and lots of 20mm oerlikons). This ship would be great as a tier 5? British "Yubari". British Heal and lots of pewpewpew!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
102
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
579 posts
4,562 battles

In general I loved the Wyoming at T4, it was a great BB to go down.

Id love to see a variation like this or another at T4 as a premium for the US line, it would be a lot of fun to play and learn up on a new vessel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
367
[XBRTC]
Members
1,199 posts
7,172 battles
7 hours ago, mobryan said:

 If you want to argue with Norman Friedman about US naval history, feel free. I'll hold your coat...

 

He doesn't always get everything right. Case in point: Soviet ALFA-class subs, and their reactor coolant. As recently as a couple years ago he was still talking about liquid sodium, a couple decades after it was conclusively proven that their primary loop was water-cooled.

(Note: I'm not saying he's wrong about AG-17, just that he's not infallible overall.)

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
253
[REVY]
Members
938 posts
7,309 battles
17 hours ago, BB3_Oregon_Steel said:

Another interesting ship is USS Utah, a former battleship first converted into a mobile target vessel in the late 20's and then refitted in early 1941 as an AA training vessel.  She is the practically unknown battleship sunk at Pearl Harbor anchored around the head of Ford Island from battleship row.  The Japanese mistook her for an operational battleship and put a number of torpedoes into her port side and she sunk at her moorings.  A later attempt to right her failed when her keel slipped on the bottom where she still remains. 

This is her just after her 1941 refit. 

GbiKlu.jpg

 

 

Actual to the few that are into such things she is well known.

 

She was actually tied up on the North side of Ford Island where the CVs usually were. Mitsuo Fuchida, the attack leader, recognized her and knew she was not a priority target, yet some younger pilots targeted her, believing her to be a CV and torpedo'd her. Fuchida was very annoyed at the waste of weapons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
293
[S0L0]
Members
850 posts
4,654 battles
5 hours ago, LT_Rusty_SWO said:

 

He doesn't always get everything right. Case in point: Soviet ALFA-class subs, and their reactor coolant. As recently as a couple years ago he was still talking about liquid sodium, a couple decades after it was conclusively proven that their primary loop was water-cooled.

(Note: I'm not saying he's wrong about AG-17, just that he's not infallible overall.)

 

Note where I said US naval history... Great historian, meh analyst, and the ALFA thing still leaves me scratching my head. All things considered, though, the Illustrated Design History books are still the definitive works of their kinds.

 

Matt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
309
[KRAB]
Members
615 posts
5,803 battles

Leave it to Ducky to suggest something like this and somehow still get taken seriously. 

It would be hilarious though.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
284
[BLUMR]
Members
2,048 posts
6,976 battles

Not sure how removing all the heavy artillery and putting on several lighter artillery and stripping most of her armor would mean she should be uptiered to tier 5 but ok...... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×