Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
FirebirdXIV

What tier XI battleship would you like to see in game?

If we added pre-missile era tier XI battleships, which one would you like to see?  

55 members have voted

  1. 1. Which tier XI battleship would you like to see in game?

    • Buffed Montana
      10
    • H series battleship
      22
    • Design A-150 class (super yamato)
      20
    • Buffed conqueror
      3
  2. 2. What is your most important consumable in your battleship?

    • Repair party
      28
    • Damage control
      15
    • Radar
      6
    • Hydroacoustic search
      6
    • Spotter aircraft/Catapult fighter
      0
  3. 3. What is your play style in a battleship?

    • close range brawling (G. Kurfurst)
      20
    • long range sniping (Yamato)
      5
    • Hit and Run + Long term damage(Fire + flooding) (Conqueror)
      5
    • Versitality (Montana)
      25
  4. 4. What is the most important weapon that you have (or need more of)

    • Main battery
      41
    • Secondaries
      13
    • Torpedoes
      1
    • AA defence
      0

30 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
61 posts
371 battles

6I found a book in the library at my house, four actually. All published about the USN USAAF US army and British armed forces. All published in the range of 1942 to 1948. I saw some things I never knew. In one of the pages, there was a diagram of the Merlin engine that powered the P-51, and naval action plans from Midway Island, 1942. There were also diagrams on ships, like USS California and USS Brooklyn. Then, late into a book on the US Navy, a four-fold paper fell out, along with a single form(it was a stat sheet). I am used to seeing stuff fall out of old books, but this one caught my eye. It was about the Montana, and it was like nothing I have ever seen (its probably old, I cannot find it anywhere on the internet.)  here are some stats it gave me:

 

 

Main Battery:

4x3 457mm guns (modified BL-1s (?) super heavy ap shell, 3 shots a minute,  6 deg./sec traverse shell weight > 1 ton

Secondary battery:

2x3 203mm guns, 6 shots a min centerline mounted (think that they are ones from Baltimore or Oregan City.) 

 6x2 152mm guns, "around" 10 shots a min 3 twin turrets per side

14x2 127mm 55 cal guns, 15 shots a minute, also used on USS Midway. 

Torpedoes:

4x4 Mk 15

2x3 Mk 16

These already exist in game, so not a big problem to Implement

AA: 

(70)-100 single and twin 12.7mm brownings

(60)-100 + Oerlikon 20mm cannons

60 + Bofors 40mm guns

Dual purpose 5-6 inch guns

Size:

Over 1000 ft long and 150ft wide

Armour:

Mainly outer (though has inner armor too)   

up to 750 mm of armor on turret faces and 558 mm of outer belt armor plus 305mm of belt armor in the inner hull, 52mm bow plating, 25mm front superstructure 20mm rear 18mm top. 

Geez, I'd like to imagine that in game, what a terror it would be. I think that in this design it would be a PERFECT ship for tier XI, but wargaming cant implement this ship without rivals? what would they be?

 

The challengers: 

H-42:

Main battery: 4x2 480mm guns

Secondaries: 12 × 150 mm (5.9 in) guns, 16 × 105 mm (4.1 in) guns,

AA: 28 × 37 mm (1.5 in) guns,  40 × 2 cm (0.8 in) guns

Torps: 6 × 53.3 cm (21.0 in) torpedo tubes

A-150: 

Its got 6 or even 9 20-inch guns in three turrets, do you really need me to explain more? Ok ok, its also got a 460mm belt and  20 or 30 4 inch dual purpose guns. 

So there we have it: three tier XI battleships I want to see in game soon. Do you? leave comments below! Also, if you have other ships (not necessarily battleships) go ahead and list them below as well.

 

Edited by FirebirdXIV
unfinished
  • Cool 5
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17
[USNGL]
Members
85 posts
4,385 battles

As fun as Tier 11 would be we'll never see it due to the fact we already got paper at T10. They'd have to start making up designs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
149
[S0L0]
Beta Testers
501 posts
3,673 battles

Where is the “Please God no” option for #1?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,157
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
7,016 posts
7,530 battles
35 minutes ago, C6tom said:

As fun as Tier 11 would be we'll never see it due to the fact we already got paper at T10. They'd have to start making up designs. 

For BB's, certainly, however there are plenty of ships and designs for the other 3 classes to add tiers, should they choose to one day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,515 posts
5,500 battles

Will the XI CV's have the first Jets I wonder available ??  This is the McDonnell Douglas FH Phantom

 

 

cv-jet1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
61 posts
371 battles

I sure hope so, but the people above have a good point; few people have aircraft carriers after world war 2. Personally, I'd like to see this dominating the skies:See the source image As for destroyer, look up Mitscher-class destroyer and you'll see a tier 11, I'd like to see it have the rocket with like, 14,000 damage and fire setting capabilities, basically a very large shell. Or as a very effective AA weapon, could do both, even though it was designed to do neither

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
919
[LEGIO]
Members
3,003 posts
5,412 battles

I would love to see this spec sheet for that insane napkinwaffe USN battleship you mentioned. Makes my own idea for a tier 11 USN battleship seem pathetically under-powered.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,428
[HINON]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,268 posts
2,029 battles

558mm of belt armor... I don't even think anyone was capable of making armor plate that thick that wasn't going to be compromised in strength somehow...

 

 

Also, fun fact - Midway actually had jets at one point in this game. No longer thought XD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
61 posts
371 battles

umm, they had a internal support. You remember when I said that it had both an inner and outer hull? I think that the logical answer (I don't know if they were doing this) is to put the primary support/frame in between the hulls, supporting both at once, and then a secondary support inside the inner hull keeping it from collapsing in on itself. Uses a lot of materials, but at least it is good at ramming. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
61 posts
371 battles
1 hour ago, Lampshade_M1A2 said:

I would love to see this spec sheet for that insane napkinwaffe USN battleship you mentioned. Makes my own idea for a tier 11 USN battleship seem pathetically under-powered.

 

 

what is the "idea" you mentioned? I'd like to hear it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
626 posts
1,630 battles

Their is more reason to go Tier -I than Tier XI tbh at BB. CV and DD could keep going but past the Midway we're getting a little too close to the present to the point where stuff is going to start being classified(Midway retired in the 90s). I guess the A 150 would be a T11 so I'd have to vote that but besides that T11 really wasn't a thing IRL even in regards to paper and fantasy ships, T9 and T10 is where all the aborted next gen BB's are, there was no real next step after this generation wasn't built. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
360 posts
194 battles

It's a lot harder to move into a higher tier/modern era with ships than it is ground vehicles or aircraft. The only real modern ship designs are for cruisers and smaller, and of course those vessels which shall not me named, lest I get hungry again for meats, lettuce, pickles, onions, mustard and mayo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
137
[SPTR]
Members
1,806 posts
848 battles

I've love to see the H-class BB's ingame since I'm a german BB main, but It's highly unlikely. We can dream, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
61 posts
371 battles
13 hours ago, Aristotle83 said:

Their is more reason to go Tier -I than Tier XI tbh at BB. CV and DD could keep going but past the Midway we're getting a little too close to the present to the point where stuff is going to start being classified(Midway retired in the 90s). I guess the A 150 would be a T11 so I'd have to vote that but besides that T11 really wasn't a thing IRL even in regards to paper and fantasy ships, T9 and T10 is where all the aborted next gen BB's are, there was no real next step after this generation wasn't built. 

 

I think that the Midway is a rare case of a ship with a lot of potential, and a great platform to retrofit and customize, as well as representing the beginning of the modern era of carriers. Because of her great potential, she served thrice as long as a normal warship. There is the dilemma that ships with 1950s electronics (that's when the first mainframe computers were installed on warships) ships that had missiles would kill ships on the other side of the map, but when engaged at close range its lack of guns would spell doom for itself. Still, I have some ideas for tier XI ships, like the Mitchener-class destroyer for an American tier XI,  and the  Tiger class cruiser for the British tier 11 CL.  I'd like to see the Forestall in-game, though it'd need better self-defense armament, maybe an easy (though not as realistic, but it was at one point planned) fix would be to place the 4x2 mk38 5 inch guns in the layout previously seen on the Lexington and Essex. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17
[USNGL]
Members
85 posts
4,385 battles
On ‎5‎/‎7‎/‎2018 at 8:30 PM, Th3KrimzonD3mon said:

For BB's, certainly, however there are plenty of ships and designs for the other 3 classes to add tiers, should they choose to one day.

I have to politely disagree because for say carriers the US would get like the forrestal class. What would any other nation get? For the Cruisers after the Des Moines no one had gun cruisers any more so you'd have to go entirely/mostly missile based which would be ridiculous for gameplay.  For DDs the US would get like Allen M Sumner or something but what would other nations get? They could really only advance the US and the Brits. IJN, Germany would not be able to move forward to XI unless WG makes stuff up and Russia has never been known for its navy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,157
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
7,016 posts
7,530 battles
1 hour ago, C6tom said:

I have to politely disagree because for say carriers the US would get like the forrestal class. What would any other nation get? For the Cruisers after the Des Moines no one had gun cruisers any more so you'd have to go entirely/mostly missile based which would be ridiculous for gameplay.  For DDs the US would get like Allen M Sumner or something but what would other nations get? They could really only advance the US and the Brits. IJN, Germany would not be able to move forward to XI unless WG makes stuff up and Russia has never been known for its navy. 

I didn't say all nations, I said plenty of ships and designs. Should you wish to disagree with me, or anyone, feel free, however, I suggest one be on solid ground before doing so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17
[USNGL]
Members
85 posts
4,385 battles
16 hours ago, Th3KrimzonD3mon said:

I didn't say all nations, I said plenty of ships and designs. Should you wish to disagree with me, or anyone, feel free, however, I suggest one be on solid ground before doing so.

The reason I brought up the fact that only the US would be really able to advance is because they aren't just going to give one or two or three nations Tier XI and leave the rest alone it wouldn't make any sense to do so. You are correct that especially for the US they could easily do Tier XI but due to other nations not being able to they just won't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
61 posts
371 battles

 

21 hours ago, C6tom said:

I have to politely disagree because for say carriers the US would get like the forrestal class. What would any other nation get? For the Cruisers after the Des Moines no one had gun cruisers any more so you'd have to go entirely/mostly missile based which would be ridiculous for gameplay.  For DDs the US would get like Allen M Sumner or something but what would other nations get? They could really only advance the US and the Brits. IJN, Germany would not be able to move forward to XI unless WG makes stuff up and Russia has never been known for its navy. 

I told you, that's where I am at a loss for what else to put. Maybe shove Shinano into tier 8 or 9 and push Hyraku up to tier 11.  Maybe give it the Nakajima J9Y as a jet fighter.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
61 posts
371 battles
22 hours ago, C6tom said:

I have to politely disagree because for say carriers the US would get like the forrestal class. What would any other nation get? For the Cruisers after the Des Moines no one had gun cruisers any more so you'd have to go entirely/mostly missile based which would be ridiculous for gameplay.  For DDs the US would get like Allen M Sumner or something but what would other nations get? They could really only advance the US and the Brits. IJN, Germany would not be able to move forward to XI unless WG makes stuff up and Russia has never been known for its navy. 

On the other hand, they made some very competent ships. The Ognevoy class and Skoryy class destroyers would be good options for tier XI, and Sverdlov-class cruiser would be perfect for tier XI as well.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17
[USNGL]
Members
85 posts
4,385 battles
1 minute ago, FirebirdXIV said:

On the other hand, they made some very competent ships. The Ognevoy class and Skoryy class destroyers would be good options for tier XI, and Sverdlov-class cruiser would be perfect for tier XI as well.

 

What's far more likely to happen is what World of Tanks has been doing which is expanding lines and moving tanks around. They'll do the same here and just add like another BB line for additional ships but it'll still stop at T10. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
282
[CVA16]
Members
2,316 posts
9,901 battles
On 5/7/2018 at 4:53 PM, C6tom said:

They'd have to start making up designs.

Start???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
788
[STW-M]
Members
2,122 posts
5,927 battles

Are we sure we can't just give the Iowa-class some Tomahawks and Phalanxes and call it a day?

Alternatively, nuclear shells.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
333 posts
5,172 battles

uuuh, tough question to answer, I would love A-150 to be in there, but sadly small cheap ships and airpower dominate throughout late WWII and even Cold war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,066
[ARGSY]
Members
6,468 posts
4,321 battles
On 08/05/2018 at 6:41 PM, FirebirdXIV said:

 

 like the Mitchener-class destroyer for an American tier XI,  and the  Tiger class cruiser for the British tier 11 CL.  I'd like to see the Forestall in-game, though it'd need better self-defense armament, maybe an easy (though not as realistic, but it was at one point planned) fix would be to place the 4x2 mk38 5 inch guns in the layout previously seen on the Lexington and Essex. 

IIRC the Tigers as built did not even have half the Minotaur's armament. So unless you're going to buff them with later-refit stuff like seriously buffed radar, hydro and fire control systems (one of them did, IIRC, serve in the Falklands campaign), Tier XI is entirely the wrong place for them. Unless you're talking about the Tigers as planned, in which case I'll have to go back to my Friedman and see exactly what that consisted of.

WIth regard to the US, I believe you are talking about the MITSCHER-class destroyer. Michener was a fine American novelist, but IIRC he never had a destroyer class named after him.

As for the Forrestal, she had 8 x 5 inch Mk42 singles (four each side) in her initial form. If this is not adequate self-defence armament for a pre-missile-era carrier, I'm not sure what is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×